Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets (JSOT Supplement Series)

JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT SUPPLEMENT SERIES

247

Editors David J.A. Clines Philip R. Davies Executive Editor John Jarick Editorial Board Robert P. Carroll, Richard J. Coggins, Alan Cooper, J. Cheryl Exum, John Goldingay, Robert P. Gordon, Norman K. Gottwald, Andrew D.H. Mayes, Carol Meyers, Patrick D. Miller

Sheffield Academic Press

This page intentionally left blank

Pivot Patterns in

the Former Prophets

Nathan Klaus

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 247

This book is dedicated to my wife Yehudit and children: Erez, Oren, Hadas and Dikla

Copyright © 1999 Sheffield Academic Press Published by Sheffield Academic Press Ltd Mansion House 19 Kingfield Road Sheffield S1 19AS England

Printed on acid-free paper in Great Britain by Bookcraft Ltd Midsomer Norton, Bath

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN 1-85075-912-X

CONTENTS

Preface Abbreviations

9 10

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Predecessors and Precursors Methodology The Connection between the Pivot Pattern and its Content The Boundaries and the Elements of the Pivot Pattern The Principle of Chapter Division Scope and Boundaries Terminology

13 13 23 25 31 33 34 38

Chapter 2 DECREE AND IMPLEMENTATION

1. Introduction 2. Solomon's Order to Fall upon Joab (1 Kings 2.31-34) 3. The Judaean Man of God's Words to the King and God's Words to Him (1 Kings 13.8-9, 16-17, 22) 4. God's Instructions to Elijah to Hide in Wadi Cherith (1 Kings 17.2-7) 5. The Healing of Na'aman (2 Kings 5.8-15) 6. Gideon's Instructions to his Men (Judges 7.17) 7. Eli Urges Samuel to Reveal to Him the Words of God (1 Samuel 3.17) 8. God's Words to Samuel Concerning the Coronation of a King (1 Samuel 8.7-9) 9. David's Oath that Solomon Shall Succeed Him as King (1 Kings 1.24-35) 10. Summary

39

39 40 50 57 64 74 75 79 83 94

6

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Chapter 3 ACTION AND OUTCOME

1. Introduction 2. Summary of the Reign of Abimelech (Judges 9.56-57) 3. The Philistines' Defeat following Goliath's Death (1 Samuel 17.51-54) 4. The Philistines' Abuse of King Saul's Body and their Message (1 Samuel 31.9-10) 5. David's Reaction to the Death of the Child (2 Samuel 12.16-20) 6. The Robbing of the Holy Artifacts by Members of the Tribe of Dan (Judges 18.16-17) 7. David in the Wilderness of Ziph (1 Samuel 23.14-15) 8. The People's Approval of David's Deeds (2 Samuel 3.36) 9. The Nature of King Solomon's Rule (1 Kings 4.20-5.5) 10. Menahem Son of Gadi Pays Tax to Pul (2 Kings 15.18-21) 11. Summary

97

97 98 101 107 110 117 122 128 132 136 140

Chapter 4

THE LANGUAGE OF REPRIMAND 1. Introduction 2. Joab's Words to David (2 Samuel 3.24-25) 3. The Dialogue between Michal and David (2 Samuel 6.20-22) 4. 'And a Certain Man Saw It and Told Joab' (2 Samuel 18.10-lla) 5. Summary

143 143 144 152 168 175

Chapter 5

PATTERNS OF REQUEST, PRAYER AND PROPOSAL 1. Introduction 2. Jonadab Son of Shimeah's Words to King David (2 Samuel 13.32-33) 3. Na'aman'sWordstoElisha(2Kings5.18) 4. Hezekiah's Prayer (2 Kings 19.15-19) 5. The Advice of Hushai to Absalom and its Approval (2 Samuel 17.7-14) 6. Abishag's Role: The Advice of David's Slaves (1 Kings 1.2)

177 177 178 184 188 194 210

Contents 7. Summary

1 215

Chapter 6 PIVOTAL PATTERNS IN OTHER GENRES

1. Introduction 2. The Law of the Blasphemer and the Law of the Murderer (Leviticus 24.13-23) 3. Amos' s Reproof Regarding the Holy Places of Judaea and of Israel (Amos 5.4-6) 4. The Fate of the Wicked (Psalms 12.4-5) 5. The Chronicler's Preface to the Listing of the Sons of Reuben (1 Chronicles 5.1-3) 6. Summary

218

218 218 227 233 237 243

Chapter 7

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

The Scope of the Patterns The Limits of the Patterns The Subject Matter of the Patterns The Identity of the Speaker in the Patterns The Relation between the Pivot of the Pattern and its Conceptual-Literary Climax Symmetry and Lack of Symmetry in Pivot Patterns Word Pairs and Word Combinations in Parallel Elements Patterns Exhibiting Ordered Repetition Redactional Patterns Textual Witnesses to the Pivot Patterns Consequences of the Pivot Patterns

Bibliography Index of References Index of Authors

244 244 245 248 250 253 256 261 272 273 274 277 279 296 308

This page intentionally left blank

PREFACE

This book was originally presented to the Hebrew University in Jerusalem in 1994 as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. A minimal number of alterations have been made to the original, and these mainly to the bibliography. I should like to express my grateful thanks to Professor Yair Zakovitch who guided me throughout the research and who provided me with outstanding advice at all times. My thanks, too, to the translator Mr Mark Cohen, who was unsparing in his efforts to render the work, originally written in Hebrew, into English, despite the difficulties encountered. My sincere thanks too, to Professor Clines and the Sheffield Academic Press who have undertaken the publication of the work. NK 1998

ABBREVIATIONS

AB AJSL ANEP ANET BASOR BDB Bib BTB BWANT BZ BZAW CBQ EstBib FOTL HUCA ICC IDBSup JBL JSOT JSOTSup JTS KHAT LB LeS Mez. Z. NCB OTL OTS RB REJ SBLMS Sem

Anchor Bible American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures James B. Pritchard (ed.), Ancient Near East in Pictures Relating to the Old Testament (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2nd edn, 1969) James B. Pritchard (ed.), Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 3rd edn, 1969) Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research Francis Brown, S.R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1907 Biblica Biblical Theology Bulletin Beitrage zur Wissenschaft vom Alien und Neuen Testament Biblische Zeitschrift Beihefte zur ZAW Catholic Biblical Quarterly Estudios bfblicos The Forms of the Old Testament Literature Hebrew Union College Annual International Critical Commentary IDB, Supplementary Volume Journal of Biblical Literature Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series Journal of Theological Studies Kurzer Hand-Kommentar zum Alten Testament Linguistica biblica LeSonenu Mezudat Zion (Miqra 'ot Gedolot) New Century Bible Old Testament Library Oudtestamentische Studien Revue biblique Revue des etudes juives SBL Monograph Series Semitica

Abbreviations StudOr TOTC VT VTSup WBC ZAW

Studia orientalia Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries Vetus Testamentum Vetus Testamentum, Supplements Word Biblical Commentary Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

11

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

1. Predecessors and Precursors Within recent decades biblical research has developed which is reliant on the foundations of general literary study. The number of researchers from differing schools of thought who share the assumption that the bible is a literary text which deserves to be examined in accordance with the standards of authentication applied to literary research has increased. This study concerns a literary stylistic aspect of the Hebrew Bible, a literary pattern which we call 'The Pivot Pattern'.1 This pattern is a model which developed out of the chiasmus. It is an elaborate multilateral chiastic structure with a pivot at its centre and with its remaining elements distributed on both of its sides in mirrored symmetry enabling the narrator to conclude his story the way he began. Such patterns exhibit the following structure: A B X B1 A'

I believe that form and content are always linked, and in my research I therefore set out to discover what the purpose of the use of this pattern is, a pattern which is not simply a formative device, but a device which serves to shape the content. My research on the pivot pattern constitutes a continuation of comprehensive oeuvres that deal with models or stylistic fundamentals.

1. Also known as: the envelope structure, pivot, concentric, mirror, etc. See the introduction to Welch (1981: 10).

14

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Parallelism,2 which was already known to the Rabbinic sages (e.g. in the '32 Middot') and of which the traditional commentators in the Middle Ages were aware, even though they did not arrive at a detailed or precise definition of it, has had a considerable number of comprehensive treatises devoted to it.3 The research on parallelism is connected with the research on word pairs.4 The connection between word pairs and parallelism was made absolutely clear by the editors of the English edition of Gesenius's dictionary, who frequently pointed out the parallel synonym of each word, emphasizing particularly its individual meaning.5 The stylistic element closest in frequency to word pairs is merismus? a form of expression (similar to metonymy and synechdoche) which includes details of the components of the whole. This is an abbreviated way of expressing totality.7 Merismus has been subjected to comprehensive research (Krasovec 1977) in which hundreds of examples of the technique have been examined. Another model which has enjoyed intensive examination by way of research is the model 'For the Three ... and for Four' (Zakovitch 1979), in which a sharp diverting of the fourth element occurs, a change which is the main feature and the climax of the literary unit.8 Before we discuss the pivot pattern, it would be appropriate to record some aspects of the history of the research into the chiasmus, which was acknowledged by scholars as meriting testing in broad outline.9 2.

For example: Listen O Heaven and I will speak. And let the earth hear the words of my mouth (Deut. 32.1).

3. This research began with Lowth (1753) who drew attention to the phenomenon of parallelism as a topic for study. Geller (1979) questioned the significance of the phenomenon of parallelism for identifying poetry sections and queried the division which had been indicated by Lowth. See Kugel (198la), various references. 4. E.g. tents-dwellings; silver-gold; milk-whey; goblet-chalice. 5. Brown, Driver, Briggs (1907). Word pairs occurring frequently in Canaanite literature. Cassutto 1958: 24. 6. In Greek: the division of the whole into its parts. See Liddel and Scott 1889: 499. 7. Thus, 'from the soul even to the flesh' (Isa. 10.18) meaning 'to everyone'. 8. E.g. when the angel revealed itself to the ass and to Balaam (Num. 22.2135). 9. Here we make mention, inter alia, of the works of Dahood (1974, 1976) and Di Marco (1975, 1979).

1.Introduction 15 The chiastic pattern™ is a linguistic pattern consisting of elements occurring in inverted internal order. The chiasmus can be represented as follows: A B-B' A' Be not

polluted

with

such things

for with all such things have the nations been polluted (Lev. 18.24) or A, B, C-C, B', A', for example the complete chiasmus

(Gen. 9.6)

If repetition increases the readers' attention, then inversion, as a pivotal pattern arrests the readers' interest even more, since it serves to emphasize the subject matter while serving as an efficient rhetorical device. In these instances form is never divorced from meaning. Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra was apparently the first commentator to give attention to this pattern in the Bible and he termed it 'he began in the way in which he concluded', see his commentary on Exod. 17.7 and he called the name of that place Temptation and Upbraiding because of the upbraiding of the Israelites and because they tempted the Lord.

He adds as follows, when a sentence in the Holy Tongue mentions two things it always begins with the second which is closest to it, as in: 'and I gave unto Isaac Jacob and Esau; and I gave unto Esau ... and Jacob and his sons went down into Egypt' (Josh. 24.4) and thus he mentions Massah first and then Merivah and then he explains Merivah, 'because of the upbraiding of the Israelites' by Moses, and then he explains Temptation (Massah): because they tempted the Lord.

And Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra explains Lev. 6.16 and Ruth 1.5, etc. in the same way (see Melamed 1978: 575-76). 10. The Rabbinic sages had already used this concept, not with reference to the Bible but in the following Talmudic reference, 'But as to loaves coated with oil and wafers soaked (in oil). How do we cope then (with oil)? (With) a type of chi and the rest we eat etc. What does a type of chi mean? Rav Kahane said a type of Greek chi (X)' (Men. 75a). There are those who derive the word chiasmus from the verb xia^co—the meaning of which is: to indicate with two diagonal lines which intercept one another. See Liddell and Scott 1889: 1991.

16

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

At a later stage Bengel (1742: 107) gave attention to the phenomenon of the chiasmus in specific sections of the New Testament, viewing it as a device which assists biblical exegesis. He is of the opinion that the chiasmus is always significant. An understanding of poetic adornment, and appreciation of the power of language and an insight into the truth and its comprehensive meaning are all implicit in an understanding of the analysed text (Bengel 1742: 23). A number of British bishops followed his style of research into the chiasmus. In 1820 John Jebb wrote the book Sacred Literature in which he makes a singularly important contribution to the phenomenon as it appears in Scripture, when he termed it INTROVERTED PARALLELISM and defined it as follows: 'There are strata constructed in a number of lines in such a way that the first line is parallel to the last and the second to the penultimate. The structure has about it a military order from the periphery to the centre' (Jebb 1820: 57). He quotes examples of this including that of Ps. 135.15-18. Thomas Boys, Key to the Book of Psalms, continued the work of Jebb by analysing 16 chapters from the book of Psalms, and became aware of the fact that the chiastic phenomenon (and to a lesser extent the phenomenon of pivot patterns, which he called introverted parallelism) appears in the Hebrew Bible as well as in the New Testament. Boys was of the opinion that this structural model also occurs in law, in dialogue, in prose and in poetry. He cites the following examples amongst others: Gen. 12.16, and Zech. 9.5. The appearance of John Forbes's (Edinburgh, 1854) book marked the continuation of the study of the chiasmus as an aid to the understanding of Scripture. The most serious attempt, however, to further Jebb's approach to the study of introverted parallelism was made in The Companion Bible, published by Oxford University and edited by Bullinger, Key to the Book of Psalms. Sections of the work were published in accordance with chiastic principles. He goes one step further and actually refers to the pivot pattern, according to our definition, and maintains (Bullinger 1890: 214) that the centre of the structure need not necessarily comprise double lines (as Boys declared) but is sufficient if it is contained within one line (e.g. Num. 15.35-36: 'So all... led him out'). Dahood in his book (1976) as well as in his article (1974) also made a considerable contribution in this field, particularly in identifying and analysing the chiastic pattern in biblical poetry. He was greatly assisted

1. Introduction

17

in this by his study of Ugaritic literature. His contribution is to the study of the pivot pattern as a limited methodology. Di Marco in his articles (1975, 1979) continued the work of his predecessors. He investigated and found both chiastic and pivot patterns in all the books of the Bible. He was of the opinion that the centre of the structure served to place emphasis on the seminal idea contained in the pattern. The most recent researchers have therefore concerned themselves, in the main, with chiastic patterns. They have also touched on pivot patterns but have not distinguished them or presented them as a distinct structural pattern. The pivot pattern was not recognized as a discrete and significant model in the study of biblical literature until the twentieth century. Apparently, Lund in his article (1930) was amongst the first of the modern researchers who investigated the pivot pattern. He referred to the research of his predecessors and defined the pattern (although he preferred to call it chiastic) as follows: the ideas in the passage appear in consecutive order terminating in the climax; they then proceed from the pivot, with or without variation, in inverted order until they form the central idea (Lund 1930: 111). He sought to prove that in the Scriptures the chiasmus determines the structure of comparatively extended literary units (Pss. 2 and 15 in the book of Psalms for example). While his contribution to the research was significant in that he drew attention to the central element (Lund 1930: 107) he apparently did not understand the complete importance of this element (nor did he grasp the scope and extent of the phenomenon) which transforms an 'ordinary' chiastic pattern into a perfect one: the pivot pattern, in which the principal idea finds its expression, in the main, within the centre of the structure. This research has progressed within the past thirty years in the light of the development of the new techniques of 'modern literary analysis' applied to biblical studies and as a result of researchers' heightened understanding of the use of the chiasmus and pivot patterns as being far more widespread than previously believed. It appears that Radday is the first of the researchers in more recent years to have given detailed attention to the pivot pattern (Radday 1964, 1973, 1974). He investigated those patterns inherent in extended literary units (e.g. the story of Solomon, the Elijah narrative and both Ruth and Esther as well as others) (Radday 1964: 52-55). He emphasized that 'the pattern of central climax is not an external embellish-

18

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

ment, which is expendable, but a stylistic device which is in fact an integral part of the content' (Radday 1964: 58) and that, as such, it is 'a means by which the author gives prominence to the principal idea by placing it at the pivot of the chiastic unit' (Radday 1964: 72). Let us examine one of the many examples which Radday quotes: Exodus 2.n A

Marriage of Moses' parents and his birth Moses taken by a King's daughter to her home C Moses rescues his Israelite brother X Moses betrayed by his bretheren C' Moses rescues non-Israelite maidens B' Moses taken by a priest's daughter to her home A' Moses' marriage and birth of his son B

(vv. 1-4) (vv. 5-10) (vv. 11-12) (vv. 13-14) (vv. 15-18) (vv. 18-20) (vv. 21-22)

The structure above is delusory in that the parallels are in fact artificially imposed and not in any way based on the detailed linguistic analysis of the text. It is determined by the researcher's caprice and is designed by arbitrary parallelism within the content and not on the literal structure of the text. This permits the creation of patterns in virtually every chapter, devoid of any firm basis, simply by appending appropriate headings. Three incidents involving conflict occur in the second chapter of Exodus. Each one represents an archetype, in which Moses appears as one who rescues the oppressed from the oppressor. In the first incident Moses rescues an Israelite from a non-Israelite, in the second he rescues an Israelite from an Israelite and in the third a non-Israelite from a nonIsraelite. This graded structure illustrates that Moses had a strong desire for the pursuit of justice which was independent of his profound love for his people. The essential element of gradation inherent in these episodes is obscured in the example above. The aspect of redemption which constitutes the essence of the narrative is replaced by the element of repudiation at the pivot of the pattern. Radday divides the passage which contains the narrative of the daughters of Midian into two or three sections so that the pivot pattern emerges. By linking the marriage with the birth in the first and final elements, Radday succeeds in glossing over the act of concealing Moses (described in more than two verses within the first element) and fails to find any parallel for it. The imbalance in the division results solely from an attempt to create a pivot pattern. 11. Radday 1964: 59. See also the addendum, Radday 1979.

1. Introduction

19

Only verbal parallelism, carefully structured about the pivot and in compact units (not in a complete chapter of 22 verses), with careful examination of each sentence without omissions, will allow the creation of a pivot pattern and will serve as an effective critical method which will be at the disposal of the reader in any attempt to identify this pattern. The pattern above does not stand up to examination in accordance with the rigorous criteria which I have set in this research thesis. This method of identifying pivot patterns in extended literary units by the comparative study of topics and not by close examination of sentence and word structure12 has been followed by many researchers in the past decades.13 Gooding (1982: 77-78) illustrates this by establishing that the entire book of Judges constitutes a pivot pattern with the Gideon episode (chs. 6-8) at its centre.14 A further systematic attempt in pivot pattern research was made by Fokkelman in his books on narrative art (and poetry) in the books of Genesis (Fokkelman 1975) and Samuel, on King David (Fokkelman 1981), on King Saul, on the 'Throne and City' and on 'vow and desire',15 in all of which he discovers pivot patterns in isolated verses, in paragraphs, in scenes and in complete sections in the chapters in the book of Samuel. Fokkelman collected and analysed pivot patterns in an entire book of the Bible, and that by way of close reading of the text. This is how he understood the contribution of the pattern to the design and aim of the creative spirit of the work. But even he, like the group of researchers which preceded him (Lund and Radday), does not rely solely on literal parallelism between the elements and he links parallels which he perceives to exist between topics and words simultaneously. This leads him to discover a pivot pattern in the description of Uriah's death (2 Sam. 11.14-25) by integrating parallels existing between topics, sentences and isolated words without distinction (Fokkelman 1981: 61). On occasion, he achieves his purpose by omitting words and complete sentences (a convenient technique for a researcher who imposes the pattern on scriptural writing, even when it

12. 13. 14. 15.

As mentioned, this was begun by Lund (1930). Pesch 1966; Radday 1981: 60; Alonso Schokel 1988: Deut. 8. Radday expressed this opinion before him (1964: 57). Fokkelman 1986, 1990, 1993.

20

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

does not exist)16 and by so doing fails to identify true patterns or even to create them where they do not exist. Authentic pivot patterns must be based on identical verbal parallelism, without any omissions whatsoever.171 have selected one example, which illustrates that Fokkelman's method does not always conform to the requirements of the correct identification of pivot patterns: Saul and the People Defeat the Ammonites (1 Samuel 77.7-77)18 A

The Amonites launch an attack on Jabesh with threats to maim them (vv. 1-2) The men of Jabesh request a delay from the enemy (v. 3) C Messengers bring the bad tidings to Givah (v. 4) D Saul hears the news from the Nation (v. 5) E The spirit of God descends on Saul (vv. 6-7a) X An urgent appeal—Saul musters the army (v. 7cd) E' The Nation is mobilized and assembles at Bezek (vv. 7e-8b) D1 The messengers are sent back to Jabesh—'salvation on the morrow' C1 The messengers bring the good tidings to Jabesh (v. 9def) 1 B The enemy is told: We shall go up against you on the morrow (v. 10) A1 The Ammonites are defeated in battle by Saul and his army (v. 11) B

The above is an example of an artificial pattern. It is long, it is reliant on content, parallelism, and not on word pairs, parallel sentences, words which are repeated and synonyms. Objective criteria for its definition are absent, and it is dependent for its existence on the arbitrary judgment of the reader. Fokkelman creates a parallel between the Ammonite attack against Jabesh and their, the Ammonites', defeat by Saul and the nation. But this parallel is deceptive. In the initial and concluding elements, different events are described in a number of sentences in each element. In the first element we encounter the description of Nachash's attack on 16. Thus Ceresko (1985: 65-66) omits words and sentences in the pivot structure, which he finds in the utterances of David to Saul about Goliath (1 Sam. 17.3637). Bar-Efrat (1980: 172) maintains that the structure should be based on one of the elements with a high degree of reasonability and reliability. A blending of different elements must be avoided. It is impossible, according to him, to base the analysis of structures in part on verbal foundations, on technical and content elements as many researchers do. Cf. Kugel in his reply to Berlin (1982: 331). 17. Watson (1981: 137) and Polak (1994: 40, 218-19) maintain that even if isolated components are employed in the structures they still do not create a pivot pattern, because a limited degree of authentication will be discovered anyway. 18. Fokkelman (1993: 456).

1. Introduction

21

Jabesh, the attempt by the people of Jabesh to enter into a covenant and Nahash's arrogant reply that the covenant will be entered into 'when each of you will gouge out his right eye'. None of these (all of them in one element of the pattern) finds a parallel in the final element (v. 11) which is confined to a description of the defeat of the enemy couched in general terms. In the second element the request of the men of Jabesh is extended over three sentences: Give us seven days respite, that we may send messengers unto all the borders of Israel: and then if there be none to deliver us we will come out

to thee.

In the parallel element we encounter the words of the men of Jabesh to the Ammonites (with one identical root ) Tomorrow we will come unto you, and ye shall do with us all that seemeth good unto you.

But the issue of the redemption and the messengers, so crucial to the passage, are not so much as alluded to. The fourth and the parallel eighth elements have no direct verbal connection. In these verses Saul, on returning from the fields, hears of the events and inquires about the reason for the people's distress, and it is at this juncture that Saul informs the men of Jabesh that they will be delivered on the next day. A tenuous contextual link between the elements around the centre does exist. In the fifth element, for instance, mention is made of the spirit of God descending mightily on Saul, and in the seventh element there is a description of the mustering of the people. It would seem to us that in this structure there is only meagre compatibility between the elements, the lines of similarity are vague and artificial and the common linguistic indicators are missing.This example does not meet the criteria for the pivot pattern stipulated in our research. The comparative study of literature (Welch 1981) made a further contribution, albeit not conclusive, to pivot pattern research, by discovering like patterns in Sumero-Akkadian and Ugaritic, as well as in Aramaic writing, Talmudic legend, the New Testament, and GrecoRoman literature. But the seminal research into the pattern is confined to the prose (Radday 1981: 50-117) and poetry (Watson 1981: 118-68) of the Bible.

22

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

The contribution of the research in comparative literature, lies in its presentation of the pivot pattern as a model which was found to a greater or lesser extent in various genres of literature, amongst various peoples, written over a period of centuries. But we must stress that we have been unable to discover finely developed, clear and definitive examples of the structure in any of these literary traditions, other than the Bible.19 There is no evidence of clearly defined verbal parallelism in the majority of these, they tend rather to depend on parallelism of content, either in isolation or combined with literal parallelism. In recent years an increasing number of biblical researchers have devoted articles, dealing with the literary analysis of scripture, to the consideration and discussion of existing pivot patterns. So, for example, in research published in 1990, Laato (in his essay) maintains that the five sections of Isa. 40.3-52.11 are in fact in the form of an extended pivot pattern, the climax of which is the episode concerning Cyrus (1990: 221). In an article published in 1991, Frisch (1991: 10) discovers a pivot pattern covering King Solomon's reign (1 Kgs 112.24) with the building and the sanctification of the Temple at its pivot (1 Kgs 6.1-9; 9).20 The inherent weakness in these and similar examples lies in the fact that they extend over a considerable number of chapters, and the researchers attempt to find contextual connections in lengthy sections (while omitting phrases and entire verses) and do not give due attention to the parallelism of sentences, repeated words and synonyms. These links which are content based are artificial, and the patterns which they produce are not actual pivot patterns as we have defined them. Kugel,21 too, emphatically maintains that these protracted patterns are spurious and are not determined in accordance with objective criteria, but are subject to the intellectual whim of the reader. The connection then, between the elements is the acid test for determining the authenticity of a given pivot pattern. Since Radday's research, which dealt with lengthy literary units, a significant number of researchers have satisfied themselves almost exclusively with content parallelism and have tended to disregard the repetition of words and sentences. 19. In the time of the first and second temple. See Radday (1964: 71); Hurvitz (1972); Di Marco (1979: 47). 20. Preceded by Radday (1964: 53). 21. In his essays (1981: 224ff.; 1982: 231); cf. Polak 1994: 214-15.

1. Introduction

23

This has resulted in the identification of a greatly exaggerated number of structures,22 but not all the examples quoted in fact fulfil the requirement of the true pivot pattern. Our research methodology differs from theirs, and this will be discussed in the following section. 2. Methodology My research concentrates on 25 structural patterns which I consider to be authentic examples of the literary device under consideration, in so far as they consist of a clearly defined relationship between parallel idioms, identical words, synonyms and antonyms. In contrast to the contributions made by the scholars mentioned in the previous section, I have adopted a methodology which deals with literary units of relatively limited length and which sets strict criteria which include meticulous examination of idiomatic and literal repetition in parallel passages. It will become apparent in the light of this that the true pivot pattern comprises balanced elements which are either parallel or antithetical and, in most cases, symmetrically constructed about a central idea. I attempt to prove that the pattern becomes valid when the repeated words within the model assume a crucial role in conveying its message. I will demonstrate that either words which occur infrequently (serving periodically as key words)23 or word pairs are of greater significance than common words which appear on the fringes of the climax.24 In addition, the same word repeated authenticates the identity of the true pattern better than different words derived from the same root.

22. This opinion is shared by Bar-Efrat (1980: 170) and Alonso Schokel (1988: 192, Concentric Patterns). Even Polak (1994: 41-42) who asserts that the model is created with certainty, when the parallel elements coincide from the point of view of language and content (which is contrary to our opinion), agrees that many of the examples of the pattern cited by Fokkelman should be rejected, because of superficial matching where the similarities are only of a general nature, or where the linguistic indications are neither well founded nor clear—there is no justification for discerning gable patterns (pivots). The schematic approach which discovers these gable patterns in every nook and cranny does not contribute in any way to the subtle and precise identification of this literary form. 23. The definition of key words (Buber 1964: 284). 24. Cf. the correct definition of a pivot pattern in Watson 1981: 137.

24

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

I will examine the structures through close reading of the text with emphasis on comprehending the meaning of both form and structure as well as the significance of the appearance of each word. I shall ask myself in which way the model contributes to the formulation of the content and expresses the meaning of the literary unit on each occasion that the author chooses to have recourse to it, as well as identifying the distinctive elements in every occurrence of the pattern. I will subject each example of the pattern to detailed literary analysis, as it is only by way of rigorous critical assessment that the role of the model in the expression of meaning can be clarified. I will examine brief structures (most of which consist of between one and five verses), which enable the narrator to organize the elements of the structure with relative ease.25 It would seem that this research will contribute not only to the field of literary style, but will also explore to a certain degree the study of the versions of the text. I will be assisted by various versions as well as by Texture witnesses (particularly the LXX) with reference to the model under scrutiny, in order to determine which of the versions is the original one. When a difference exists between the LXX and any other version I shall have to give due consideration to which of the versions is defective and which authentic, and whether in fact the authentic version meets the required criteria of the model. As secondary sources I shall make use of research conducted on the subject of chiastic structures, as well as the extensive biblical commentaries on the Former Prophets. The analysis of the structures will also promote understanding of the editorial techniques in the sections under discussion. I shall examine whether in fact each narrative passage constitutes a unified whole, written by one narrator or whether the possibility exists that the model consists of the integration of a number of different literary elements comprising two distinct literary genres (a narrative section together with a brief list for example) conceivably attesting to the fact that even 25. Cf. Watson 1981: 136; he maintains that it is difficult to create a pivot pattern within extended sections of poetry, considering the process of poetry writing in which short sections serve to make up a longer section. Thus Polak (1994: 215) maintains that it is simple to discern the pattern within the limited framework of a verse or section. But problems arise when attempting to do this within a larger framework, as is the case when the pattern may appear interwoven with other patterns.

1. Introduction

25

the redactor, by integrating these disparate components, was consciously creating a pivot pattern. The research methodology will focus, therefore, on demonstrating the presence of the pivot pattern in the literary units under discussion, 'close reading' of the text, stressing the way in which the device contributes to the formulation of meaning, and the identification of the central idea which is situated, in the main, at the pivot of the structure. I shall seek to clarify in which way each pattern is a deserving and appropriate vehicle for expressing the message inherent in it. By means of this research I shall compile a manual and guide for the understanding of the pattern and I shall define the distinguishing characteristics of the various forms of pivot pattern. Thus, for example, I shall examine the relationship between the pattern itself and its literary and ideastic climax, the symmetry inherent in the structures and why the design is consistently a mirror image of elements on both sides of the climax or whether examples exist where the parallel elements are identical and why this is so. At the conclusion of the study the reader will have the opportunity of reviewing general conclusions stemming from a detailed analysis of individual examples. 3. The Connection between the Pivot Pattern and its Content In his system, which he termed 'Interpretive Totality', Weiss correctly emphasized the unity of content and form: Any idea expressed in a specific way cannot be expressed in any other, or if it is expressed in particular words or a distinctive phrase, one or other metre, sound, or word association—in each one of these cases no other mode of expression will be appropriate. All these components comprise the very essence of any literary creation, they are not an embellishment, they are not ornate garments with which the author adorns his ideas and of which he can divest them without changing the entire nature of the work and its central theme (Weiss 1962: 20).

'The content determines the form, and the form cannot exist without the content', as Goethe said. Form and content simply do not lend themselves to separation, they are co-ordinates whose very being is totally integrated and whose existence depends on their reciprocal relationship. In so far as you disturb or separate these associated elements you unwittingly nullify the one precisely at the moment that you

26

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

achieve the other (Semah 1954: 205). This recognition of the unity of content and form and the study of the meaning of the creative unit and its literary intention, requires us to give full attention to each detail and its place in the work as a whole. These criteria apply to the analysis of the pivot pattern as well. The fact that its utilization is purely for aesthetic purposes should not even be considered. Nor should it be viewed as a poetic adornment or a mnemonic aide memoir26 in oral literature. First and foremost the pivot pattern enables us to arrive at a complete understanding and interpretation of a particular episode, because the central idea appears in most cases at the climax of the structure, at its pivot. That is to say that the literary form of any section of the pattern is not merely structural, but is connected to the content and serves as a full partner in the moulding of meaning. I shall attempt to prove the correctness of Bengel's contention that there is a connection between form and content in the New Testament, which is expressed in chiastic patterns (Bengel 1742: 2), by reference to pivot patterns in the Bible. Two principle characteristics of the pivot pattern which assist in the comprehension of a section of the Bible in which it occurs are: A. B.

The presence of an isolated central point, whose function it is to focus the reader's attention (cf. Freedman 1981: 7). The presence of particular fundamentals on parallel sides of the structure which complement and reinforce one another. Together these create a composite entity which could not have been situated in one element of the pivot only (Stock 1984: 23).

A pattern such as this comprises two elements which are balanced and which are either parallel or antithetical, constructed symmetrically about a central idea. This type of structure serves to clarify the meaning of the excerpt because the author frequently places the main idea at its centre. The design might be diagramatically represented as follows:

26. Breck (1987: 71) as also Welch (1981: 12). Kessler (1978: 44) is of the opinion that the biblical authors began with inclusio, progressed to the chiasmic pattern and refined it as the pivot pattern.

1. Introduction A

27 B

C Bl

Al

The architectural design of the passage is inextricably connected to its meaning (Di Marco 1979: 44-45, 54). The literary model, which I term the pivot pattern, contributes both to the comprehension of the texts and to its literary form, as well as to its being connected to its content and elucidating its essence (cf. Breck 1987: 70). Many of the researchers ask whether as a result of a predetermined form, in our case the pivot pattern, the biblical author does not limit himself of his own free will to strict guide lines, like the poet writing a sonnet, for example.27 I assume that the author, like the poet, when employing this specific pattern, is continuing a literary tradition. The biblical writer expresses his thoughts while conforming to a particular literary pattern. Just as the biblical poetic mould adheres to the formula which incorporated parallelism, or word pairs, so biblical narrative follows the pivot pattern model, while confirming the sense of the content, a phenomenon acceptable in ancient literature. Yet the pattern does not inhibit the author or prevent him from imposing his individuality and his unique personal stamp on the work. The result is the free expression of the writer's creative will. I am obliged then to view this phenomenon for what it is and to understand the bond which exists between him and his literary purpose (Zakovitch 1979: 11-13). The pivot pattern may appear as a sophisticated structure to the contemporary reader, which, possibly, was not intended by the author at the outset. Could he have relied on the ability of the reader of his time to comprehend? But the questions as to whether the author introduces the structure intentionally, or whether the reader would have been capable of deciphering it, are irrelevant: if the pattern exists, then they will identify it and pay it due attention. Nevertheless, it is apparent that this literary device, which I term the pivot pattern (however imperfect) was well known in the ancient world, as it occurs (as mentioned above) in Sumerian, Akkadian and Ugaritic as well as Greek and Roman literature. Possibly the modern reader of contemporary literature would give scant attention to this phenomenon, simply because they are neither

27. See Goldberg, in the introduction to her book (1953).

28

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

accustomed to encountering it, nor are they schooled in recognizing it. But, as I have pointed out, the reader of a past period in time would have been familiar with it. Cognitive psychology indicates that listening is determined by an understanding, that perceived sounds transmit a message, and that they convey specific meaning. The actual decoding of sound involves an algorithmic process, whereby the listener accepts that a set of rules which follow a given order is complied with, in the analysis of sounds, which ensures correct decoding if the encoding has been performed competently. The listener (not to speak of the reader, who has ample time to read and re-read) processes the sounds, filters out unwanted sounds and creates clear, meaningful sentences that add significantly, and at a high level, to the understanding of the content (Zevit 1990: 390). This technique develops from the way that he has been educated. The reader who has been accustomed to listening to the repetition of stories and expressions designed to endear them to him would have been aware that this structure was one of the ways in which repetition would find expression. In ancient literature, even that which preceded the biblical (such as the Akkadian and Ugaritic epic) repetition of words was an accepted literary technique, which was in complete accord with the tastes of the reader of the time. It should be stated however, that this does not necessarily imply that he was conscious of the pivot pattern. Some researchers trace that which characterizes repetition as part of biblical literature to its oral sources. According to Cassuto: this phenomenon is linked by its very nature to the epic which was principally designed for listening rather than reading. The audience that gathered to hear the ballads sung by the minstrel, derived particular enjoyment when those ballads began with a refrain that was familiar and much loved, because it facilitated listening to and even participating in the song (Cassuto 1958: 34)

or the folk background, from which it was drawn, or the need which resulted from the problem involved in absorbing oral literature (Sternberg 1977: 114). Repetition is characteristic of oral literature throughout the generations. On the face of it, at least, it is the factor which clearly distinguishes the oral literary tradition from the written (Zakovitch 1981: 33). But, whatever the case, the reader's attention is stimulated by repetition, especially in the examination of a literary genre which stylistically is based on an economy of words. Within this phenomenon (i.e. of repetition) there exist two clearly

1. Introduction

29

discernible forms: (a greater or lesser degree of) verbal or literal repetition, and elegant variation. In the former, the human or the divine utterance is repeated for a number of reasons, for example, in the combination of decree-action (e.g. Gen. 6.18; 7.7). The precise repetition serves as an indirect means for the moulding of the character of the speaker or of the one who implements the action or of the relationship between them. Thus we understand why Noah, who initiates the action, is described as having 'found favour in the sight of the Lord' (Gen. 6.8). The most impressive example of this is: 'and God said Let there be light, and there was light' (Gen. 1.3). There is no need here for detailed elaboration by the narrator in order to increase the greatness of the instigator of the action and the comprehensiveness of his success. The laconism of the form of the command and its implementation—and the total identity one with the other conceals a powerful literary effect. By juxtaposing action and information, the Bible exploits the perfection of the technique of parallelism to illuminate the character who is conveying the information, as in the words of the narrator, 'and when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was despised in her eyes', and as in Sarah's words to Abraham, 'and when she saw that she had conceived, I was despised in her eyes' (Gen. 16.4-5) (Sternberg 1977: 122). Repetition, in the prose section of Scripture, does not consist of word for word congruency. Prose is designed more for reading than for listening, and the reader does not need, as the listener does, words that have already been learnt by rote by him. On the contrary, exact repetition may periodically become burdensome. As a result prose tends, in conformity with artistic good taste, to vary phrases or to abbreviate them, or to change their order when repeating a particular episode (cf. Cassuto 1958: 34). Elegant variation, which is characteristic of the literary tradition28 and which is frequently encountered in the Bible, possesses a stylistic anomaly, not anticipated by the reader, which stirs his awareness towards understanding its raison d'etre (contrary to the opinions of Ibn Ezra in his commentary on Exod. 20.1) and Rabbi David Kimchi (in his commentary on Gen. 24.39)—'The words differ only the sense is the same'. But, in accord with Malbim (in his introduction to Isaiah): 'We will not find parallelism of meaning expressed in different words 28. Cf. Zakovitch (1979: 4), as also (1981: 33).

30

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

by the angels and by the living God'). This repetition is always meaningful and comprehensible. Careful examination of the Scriptures proves that repetition is always varied. Every utterance which is repeated entails some degree of change. The structure of biblical repetition has a quintessentially mimetic character. The repetitive components do not generally constitute descriptions of a specific situation in the world of the narrative, but tend to be linked rather with everything that is interwoven in the overall course of the action and play a role in propelling it forward. The object of repetitive transmission of an issue within the framework of the words of the literary creation fulfils the important function of advancing the dynamic of what is taking place, as well as periodically providing emphasis and re-inforcement (cf. Steraberg 1977: 114, 121). A diversion in the repetition formula serves not only to illuminate the characterization but also to insinuate the development of a plot.29 Each deviation from the pattern of repetition is rich in meaning and makes its contribution to the formation of the literary work's intention, as well as to the understanding of plot and character. I shall examine these exceptions meticulously and with great attention to detail. It should be noted that the very backbone of any literary creation is inherent in these nuances, and not in the presence of structures consisting of precise repetition (cf. Zakovitch 1979: 9). I have also found a significant difference between repetition, which is more or less exact, within the framework of a specific utterance by a particular speaker and relationships between repetition within a structural framework that combines a number of spoken phrases emanating from the same speaker or more usually from a few speakers (as in the example of the pivot pattern in 1 Kgs 1.24-35) (Sternberg 1977: 121). If, as I have mentioned, repetition arouses the attention of the reader, then how much more would this apply to repetition in which there is no added information, and which is presented in inverted order. This form of repetition serves to emphasize the subject matter and is, in addition, an effective rhetorical tool (Stock 1984). The reader recognizes two fundamental elements within the structure, equilibrium and inversion, which create a third: climactic centrality. The conclusion, which is in itself a type of commencement, draws the reader's attention to the centre of the pattern, to the climax, and the 29. Alter 1988: 199 and cf. Polak 1994: 61-63.

1. Introduction

31

elements at the periphery which serve to bring it into focus (1 Sam. 17.53). Generally I shall find that the main idea is situated at the centre of the structure, at its pivot, and once again I must stress that form and content are inseparable: the content (the central idea) and the form (the central element) are interlaced one with the other. In my research I shall examine whether this relationship exists in all the structures, that is the centre of the pattern offers a central idea, or whether periodically some different connection exists, and, if so, what the reason for this might be. 4. The Boundaries and the Elements of the Pivot Pattern In the pivot pattern we find clear parallelism between the sentences and between the words which appear in the parallel elements on either side of the pivot. Determining the existence of a pivot pattern is dependent on restricting the boundaries of its elements. It is possible to be assisted in this by the cantillation marks of the biblical text, and to find elements which conclude with 'keiserim' (siluk and etnachta—the full stops of the cantillation marks) or with melachim (zakef and segol, for example which are the 'commas' of the cantillation marks), but it is also possible to ignore the cantillation marks and use another means of ascertaining the bounds of the elements. Whichever is the case, division of a verse into elements constitutes a problem which confronts those who have to determine whether they are dealing with an authentic pivot pattern or not. I shall prove in my research that there is no distinguishing feature by which elements can be recognized. I will learn that on occasions an entire verse constitutes an element.30 But generally I have extracted simple sentences which represent an element.31 Periodically, however, we also encounter complex or even compound sentences as elements32 or, in certain cases, the object33 or the subject34 of the verb, separated 30. 'Let there be sought for my Lord the king a young maiden' (1 Kgs 1.2). 31. 'And he killed them with the sword and my father David the king, knew it not'(1 Kgs 2.32). 32. 'But when David saw that his servants whispered, David understood that the child was dead' (2 Sam. 12.19). 33. 'And, behold, thou sawest him, and why didst thou not smite him there to the ground?' (2 Sam. 18.11). 34. 'And the six hundred men girt with their weapons of war' (Judg. 18.16).

32

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

from the rest of the sentence, can be considered as an element. To sum up, I shall attempt to prove in this study that the biblical author did not consider himself rigidly confined in constructing pivot patterns. He was free to build them in accordance with the needs of the model, using long or short, simple or compound sentences and on occasion even sections of sentences on their own—each according to the topic at hand—and the majority of these patterns constructed from sentence elements parallel in form and similar from the point of view of the type of sentence and its scope. In considering the origins of biblical literature it is apparent that there was a tradition of the oral transmission of the text. I am confronted therefore with two stages, the oral and the written. The psycholinguists, represented by Zevit,35 propound the theory of 'echoic memory'. In their opinion 'the Israelite in ancient times knew how to read from the conclusion to the commencement as well'. The phenomenon of a repetitive structural or formative element caused readers to identify parallelism when they encountered it. Echoic memory is a conscious activity which definitely assists the listener in establishing a connection between words and between sentences and to understand in this way that inverted repetition creates a pivot pattern, in which the climax is invariably situated at the centre. This linguistic understanding reveals the pivot pattern to the listener. But biblical literature is of course a part of the written literary tradition and readers who peruse it are accustomed to and aware of the fact that repetition is meaningful. Their eyes scan the page from right to left, and back again without restriction. The reader has a more active role in absorbing the text than the listener, who follows the narrative as it flows forward along a single channel (Zakovitch 1981: 33). The reader of Scripture is skilled in the art of reading, revising and comprehending the full meaning of the text. Just as the chiastic pattern was familiar to, and understood by, the reader, and this is not disputed, so he also recognized the pivot pattern, which is a sub-category of the chiastic structure. It is possible to contend that the way in which I classify the pattern in my study is artificial. But this does not appear to be so to me. I have trieid not to break up utterances expressing a unified idea and not to match phrases in which the issues are obviously different. I have not included sections that at first glance seemed to be pivot patterns only 35. Cf. Zevit (1990: 391,396 n. 41).

1. Introduction

33

because I assumed that breaking up the sentence (e.g. 'and the Lord hath returned upon thee all the blood of the house of Saul in whose stead thou hast reigned' [2 Sam. 16.7-8]) would contribute perhaps to identifying the pattern, but would not fit the structure of the sentence (see below). 5. The Principle of Chapter Division The process of classifying sections of the text containing the model under discussion in the Former Prophets, according to their function, shows that many of these describe matters in which we anticipate repetition. In a number of the patterns there is a description of decree and implementation, or of decree alone. The author employs this pattern, when the decree and implementation are included, in order to indicate that the decree has been properly implemented. When only the decree is included in a pivot pattern, then the purpose is to stress its significance (see the examples which follow). The phenomenon of action and outcome is described in many of the patterns.The author demonstrates that the outcome is parallel to the action and is in accord with what is expected from it. Periodically a phrase occurs which illustrates the principle of 'measure for measure', and the pivot pattern is ideal for describing it. In certain structures I have identified expressions containing reprimands which the speaker repeats, but in inverted order, for the sake of emphasis, and this creates a pivot pattern. Many of the patterns contain attempts at intercession', requests, prayer and proposal. It is reasonable to assume that the speaker in his attempt to influence the listener to implement his request or advice will repeat what he has to say, for the sake of emphasis. So the pivot pattern is chosen precisely because it emphasizes the essence of the matter which invariably appears at its climax. I can conclude from this that, in the sections that include the literary pattern under discussion, I can anticipate repetition according to their requirements. The division into sections matches the examples which I have used in my study. All the examples included fit the pattern of division. There are, however, instances where the complete structure does not accord with its section. So, for example, in Chapter 2, 'Decree and Implementation', I have quoted David's oath, that Solomon his son will sit on his

34

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

throne (1 Kgs 1.24-35), even though the first part of the structure deals with the attempt by Nathan and Bathsheba to influence David to crown Solomon as King. But there is no doubt that the main concern of the structure, which occupies more than half of it, is David's oath and his instructions to those concerned with the matter that they will anoint Solomon as king. We must bear in mind that I am dealing with literature and not with some exact science. The justification for the way in which this episode was divided lies in the fact that it enables me 'to see the trees within the wood', to understand the purpose and the characteristics of the function of this literary phenomenon. The topic of my study is a literary-rhetorical phenomenon and therefore the division into chapters is essentially functional,36 in that it enables the reader to consider the uniqueness of the phraseology pertaining to a particular subject in the pattern as opposed to the rest of the words and phrases in the structure. 6. Scope and Boundaries The literary tradition known as the pivot pattern is found in most of the narrative books of the Bible. It is clear that as a result of the extensive incidence of the pattern it would be impossible to deal with every instance of the structure as they occur in the Bible, as this would become unmanageable. I will therefore have to confine the work to selected books. I have chosen to focus on the books incorporated in the section of the scriptures known as the Former Prophets for the purposes of our research. Structurally, the majority of these books consists of narrative (and other forms of prose), and they suit the purpose of the study, in that I have decided to examine those examples of the structure which occur in prose in the biblical narrative, as there is enough material in these books to enable me to arrive at an understanding of the significance and the scope of the pivot pattern. In practice I have discovered examples in all of the Former Prophets, with the exception of the book of Joshua. The nature of this book differs from that of the other Former Prophets. The second half of the book deals exclusively with the partitioning of the land into the areas to 36. This was the way in which the researchers before me treated the literary phenomenon about which they wrote in their research, cf. Zakovitch 1979.

1. Introduction

35

be inherited by the tribes of Israel, and even the other chapters contain an insignificant number of examples of dialogue, whereas there is a preponderance of descriptive passages dealing with the wars (for instance ch. 11 contains but a single verse of dialogue! One command from God to Joshua occurs and the rest of the verses are devoted to incidents and not conversation). The ratio of the number of chapters to the incidence of pivot patterns in the remaining books is as follows: Judges Samuel Kings

21 chapters— 54 chapters— 47 chapters—

3 structures— 12 structures— 10 structures—

a ratio of 7:1 a ratio of 5:1 a ratio of 5:1

From this we learn that we have not succeeded in extracting one example of the structure from the book of Joshua, in which there are ten narrative chapters, consisting mainly of descriptions of the war with few examples of dialogue. In the light of the ratios in the other books of the former prophets and the nature of the book of Joshua, this absence does not surprise us. I maintain that this research will promote the study of the model termed the pivot pattern, as well as prove that it is a frequently recurring element in the books of the Former Prophets (my vigorous criteria notwithstanding). It will also provide further impetus for research into this literary model as it appears in other books of the Bible and categories of literature, which are not encountered frequently in the Former Prophets (e.g. law, prophecy, poetry and lists). For this reason I have quoted examples from the categories enumerated above in order to emphasize that the pattern is not confined exclusively to the prose narrative. These examples will be found at the end of those chapters dealing with the phenomenon in the Former Prophets. My readers, well versed in biblical literature, may be surprised by why I have not included one or other section in my research. I must state that I had great difficulty with certain isolated cases, both those included in my research and those left out, because of the absence of absolute symmetry in the structure. This may provide an opportunity for scholarly debate but I am reconciled with my choices: structures which did not stand up to strict scrutiny were not included. Those which do appear were found to be deserving of attention. This is why the study is confined to only 25 examples of pivot patterns in the entire Former Prophets. I have already indicated in Section 2 that the measures for authentication which I have adopted in this

36

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

research are extremely rigorous. I draw precise parallels between words and between expressions which occur in the elements on both sides of the centre. I do not skip or dismantle sentences. Content parallelism is not acceptable to me and it is my opinion that employing these techniques is deceptive and misleading. During the course of my work borderline examples presented themselves which gave me considerable difficulty, but, that not withstanding, I restricted myself to definite instances, in view of the fact that my concern was not with quantity but with the recognition of the pattern and its contribution to the overall understanding of biblical literature. Therefore I have confined myself to those instances of the pattern which are not in doubt. I have selected three examples which gave me cause for doubt and which I decided finally to exclude from this research study: The Conditions Stipulated in the Covenant between David and Abner (2 Samuel 3.13) A

thou shall not see my face except thou first bring X Michal, Saul's daughter B' when thou comest A' to see my face B

I rejected this structure, despite the parallelism, because the existence of the structure is dependent on the object as an independent element, something which is not acceptable, especially when it constitutes the climax of the pattern. The division of the second sentence 'When thou comest to see my face' into two elements for the sole purpose of creating a pivot pattern appears to be totally artificial. Shimei Curses David (2 Samuel 16.7-8) A

Begone, begone thou man of blood and base fellow the Lord hath returned upon thee. X all the blood of the house of Saul, in whose stead thou hast reigned B' And the Lord hath delivered the Kingdom into the hand of Absalom thy son A' And behold, thou art taken in thy mischief because thou art a man of blood. B

(v. 7) (v. 8)

1. Introduction

37

This example was also rejected by me because the entire existence of the pattern is conditional on presenting the object as an independent element at the climax of the pattern. It is also difficult to accept the parallelism in the second element where it is dependent exclusively on the name of the Lord, because the tetragrammaton occurs so frequently throughout Scripture. The words with the root , too, that occur in lines three and four detract from the pattern's force. I should state, however, that this reason alone would not have been sufficient to disqualify this particular structure. Together with the aforementioned reasons, however, its rejection becomes justified. The Reply of the two and a half Tribes to Joshua (Joshua 1.16-18) A

All that thou hast commanded us we will do, and whithersoever thou sendest us we will go B According as we hearkened unto Moses in all things, so will we hearken unto thee X Only the Lord thy God be with thee as he was with Moses B' Whosoever he be that shall rebel against thy commandment and and shall not hearken unto thy words A' In all that thou commandest him, he shall be put to death; only be strong and of good courage.

(v. 16) (v. 17)

(v. 18)

In this case, unlike the previous examples, the number of sentences is greater than the number of elements. In the first element there are actually two sentences; 'all that thou has commanded us', and 'whithersoever thou sendest us we will go'. This is repeated in the fifth and the last of the elements, each of which contains two separate sentences: 'in all that thou commandest him, he shall be put to death', and the words of inspiration 'only be strong and of good courage'. It is clear that this double separation is there only to create a pivot pattern, and this is not acceptable. 'Violation' of the text for the sake of creating the pattern is not permissible. This is sufficient cause to discount the structure, as is, I might add, a repetition of the appearance of the expression 'all; that' , which impairs the pattern, twice in the first line, as against once in the last, and in between the second and the fourth lines—a lack of symmetry between and 7. Terminology In this research I have made use of the following terms, indicating gradation from the simple to the more complex and from the minor to the major:

38

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets 1. 2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

ELEMENT: a section of a verse (generally) found in parallel on both sides of the pivot of the structure. SCENE: an episode in a story, comprising at least one central incident and at its source, at least one piece of dialogue (2 Sam. 18.21 for example). SECTION or EPISODE: a succession of a small number of verses. The section possesses an internal unity dealing with one issue, it possesses common characters, and has within it a unity of time and place. PICTURE or ACT: a combination of a number of sections. The story is divided into a number of pictures or scenes, according to a particular incident which occurs in the developing plot, which is connected with a specific time and place, and to particular characters, to a happening which has as its centre a new issue, different characters and a new stage on which it is enacted. LITERARY UNIT: an independent literary creation which is not restricted in length, which has clearly defined boundaries and common characters. STORY: a cycle of stories as in the Gideon story (Judg. 6-8), the Solomon story (1 Kgs 2-11), the Elijah story (1 Kgs 172 Kgs 2), etc.

Chapter 2 DECREE AND IMPLEMENTATION

1. Introduction In this section of research I shall deal with pivot patterns, in which there is a decree or a decree and its implementation.1 After a decree there is usually a report on its implementation, even when the implementation is obvious from the developing action, and even when, as is occasionally the case, the identical wording to that which appeared in the original decree is used.2 Thus we find: 'and God said: Let there be light. And there was light' (Gen. 1.3); and also 'therefore Eli said unto Samuel: Go, lie down; and it shall be, if thou be called, that thou shall say: Speak, Lord; for Thy servant heareth ... Then Samuel said: Speak; for Thy servant heareth' (1 Sam. 3.9-10) (cf. Zakovitch 1979: 96). This type of exact literal repetition within the decree and its implementation is also encountered in the Ugaritic literature, which preceded the Bible. It is found in Kereth's decree to his wife Hurai to prepare a feast for the dignitaries of his Kingdom, and in her implementation of the instruction.3 Usually the repetition of the decree and its implementation are not identical. The text in Num. 17.11-12, 1 Sam. 6.7-11 and 2 Sam. 19.8-9 for example demonstrates how complex and varied is the model which 1. Only rarely does the issuer of the decree express his agreement in direct speech, as is Benaia's response to David's decree regarding Solomon's accession to the throne (1 Kgs 1.36-37)—followed by the description of the implementation (vv. 38-40). 2. But at times it is repeated by way of a report: it is stated after the decree: 'And it was so' (Gen. 1.9); 'and Jeremiah did thus' (Jer. 38.12), without further detail. On occasions the Narrator repeats the main idea briefly and deletes unimportant sections of the sentence: 'And he went, and fetched, and brought them to his mother' (Gen. 27.9, 14). 3. KTU 28-2.6.15, according to Amir (1987: 87-88).

40

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

we term the decree and its implementation in the Bible, in that it contains the interchange of words, their deletion and addition, changes in the order of the action, and the omission of aspects of the decree (cf. Kravitzl971:2). It would seem that these changes are merely for the sake of variation, but they convey definite meaning. The crucial distinction in the examples of the model under discussion which I cite in my research is, understandably, the inversion of the order of the details to the extent that it forms a pivot pattern. In the first part of the chapter, I deal with a pattern in which the decree and its implementation constitute the model and in which degrees of variation are encountered. In the latter half of the chapter I shall discuss a number of structures which include only the decree (the implementation is described later, but is not included in the pivot pattern). It becomes clear, therefore, that there are structures that differ slightly, that constitute a section of this chapter, and which emphasize the decree and give validity to the words of the one who issues it. 2. Solomon's Order to Fall upon Joab (1 Kings 2.31-34) And the king said unto him: A

Do as he said and strike him down, but bury him (v. 31) and remove the innocent blood that Joab shed from myself and my father's house C and the Lord will cause his blood to return upon his head. (v. 32) D because he slew two men more upright and better than he X and he killed them with the sword without my my father David knowing it, D1 Abner son ofNer, the commander of the army of Israel and Amasa son of Yeter, the commander of the army of Judah. C1 Their blood will return upon Joab's head and his seed for all time (v. 33) B' But on David and his seed, his house and his throne may there be peace from the Lord for eternity. A1 Benaia, son of Yehoyada went up, struck him down, and killed him. He was buried in his house in the wilderness (v. 34) B

The section, in which the decree issued by Solomon to strike Joab down and its implementation appears (vv. 31-34), is part of a greater picture (see the terminology list above) consisting of vv. 28-35. This section, in which Joab is the principal role player, both actively and

2. Decree and Implementation

41

passively, is found amongst sections dealing with Solomon's retribution against his enemies within, who threatened either him or his father David. In this description of Solomon dispatching his adversaries, the author demonstrates the extent to which Solomon's hold on the Kingdom is secure (v. 12—the introduction to the picture ['and his kingdom was established firmly'], v. 46—to its conclusion ['and the kingdom was established in the hand of Solomon']) and how prudently he had acted on his father's advice, in his final testament, to 'do according to your wisdom' (v. 2.6). The scene concerning Joab is divided clearly into two parts (except for the opening—28—and concluding—35— verses): Solomon's first command to Benaiah, to strike Joab down (vv. 29-30)4 and his second command to Benaiah to strike Joab down as a consequence of the first command not having been executed (vv. 31-34). These two commands commence, respectively, with the words 'strike him down' and 'and strike him down'. There are those who might discern a pivot pattern in the section vv. 29-31 (Fokkelman 1981: 401). But this does not constitute a perfect pattern. In the section vv. 31-34, Solomon's second command to strike Joab down and its implementation, however, a definite pivot pattern emerges. Verse 35 is not a part of this structure and the issue which it contains is dealt with later: not a matter of a decree and its implementation, but the question of appointments in place of someone who has been exiled and someone who was killed in place of Evyatar and Joab. There are those researchers who are of the opinion that Solomon's utterances in these verses (31-33) are an extension (Long 1984: 54) or an addition based on a pre-Deuteronomic source.5 Apparently they depend very definitely on the testament of Solomon's father in this chapter (vv. 5-6), on the story of Abner's murder in general and on David's words thereafter in particular (2 Sam. 3, and see below). And the King said unto him, do as he said and strike him down, but bury him (v. 31)—Solomon refers to Joab's pronouncement (when he 4. Solomon's first command is not in pivot form, possibly because it incorporates a short command 'Go, and strike him down' (29), which is not carried out and which is not accompanied by reasons for this slaying as is the case with the second instruction. 5. Rogers (1988: 412); Seeligmann (1992a: 75) is of the opinion that mention of the spilling of blood by Joab in time of peace deviates in style from the context in which it is situated and is nothing but an additional attempt to alleviate Solomon's guilt and to describe Joab's death as a righteous act in David's memory.

42

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

assumes that Solomon would not dare to dispatch men to kill him in the sanctuary of the Lord), 'No, for I shall die here' (v. 30), almost like 'thy mouth hath testified against thee' (2 Sam. 1.16) and instructs Benaiah to kill him there, before the altar, which does not protect anyone who murders with intent. Solomon, here, extends the scope of the law: 'thou shall take him from Mine altar that he may die' (Exod. 21.14) to actually killing the murderer next to the altar (cf. Frisch 1986: 218). It would seem that Solomon issued the command 'and strike him down' and not 'kill' either in order to minimize the degradation of Joab, the faithful servant of David, or to present himself in a more positive light—not as one who kills, but as one who merely strikes down. The distinction between the two arises out of a comparative study of the genres of literature in which this verb occurs. For instance: 1 Sam. 22.18 as opposed to 1 Sam. 22.17, 2 Sam. 4.12; and 2 Sam. 1.15, where the Amalekite's punishment is described: 'And he smote i him that he died'. Whereas in this verse it is written as follows: 'and he struck him down and killed him' (v. 34), and in the case of Adonijah, it is said: 'and he struck him down and he died'(2.25). But bury him—in the first instruction to strike Joab down (v. 29) we find 'and strike him down' on its own, whereas here 'and strike him down, and bury him'. It is as if Benaiah's reluctance to kill Joab in this hallowed place prompts Solomon to add the words and also the phrase as guidance for the burial of Joab, side by side with the enormity of killing him next to the altar, all of which constitutes a measure of moral justification for the grave act committed against the commander of his father's army.6 Solomon stated that they would bury him as a sign of honour towards him, and because he served his father (cf. v. 26—the instructions to Abiathar), as a great commander in Israel. It was also important to cover the blood of violence spilt, as it is said: 'the ground which opened its mouth' (Gen. 4.11), 'earth, cover not my blood' (Job 16.18) (Gray 1964). Even if Solomon did not conduct himself honourably with regard to Joab when he was alive, at least he did so after his death.

6. In the case of Jezebel, who was cast out of the window on Jehu's instruction, he also commanded, 'Go, see now to this cursed woman, and bury her. for she is a King's daughter' (2 Kgs 9.34), in contrast to the words of Elisha the Prophet: 'And the dogs shall eat Jezebel in the portion of Jezre'el and there shall be none to bury her' (2 Kgs 9.10 as well as Jer. 22.19).

2. Decree and Implementation

43

1 and remove the innocent blood that Joab shed from myself and my father's house.

As Joab had not been punished for this double murder, the sin loured over the house of my father and over me as his heir. Suspicion will be removed only when the nation sees that Joab has been executed at the behest of the King, for the act of murder ... They will be aware that Joab did not kill Abner and Amasa on David's instructions. And furthermore: if he is not judged now, then his sin will be ascribed to the King (Ehrlich 1900).

This was the innocent blood spilt, without judgment, as in 'that this shall be no stumbling-block unto thee, nor offence of heart unto my Lord, either that thou hast shed blood without cause' (1 Sam. 25.31) without sin or guilt. These words are connected to the utterances of David in justifying himself after the murder of Abner: 'And afterwards when David heard it he said: I and my kingdom are guiltless before the Lord forever from the blood of Abner son of Ner' (2 Sam. 3.28). Even though it is Solomon who pronounces sentence upon Joab, he uses David in his own defence: 'my father's house' (v. 31); 'without my father David knowing it' (v. 32); and 'But may David and his seed, his house and his throne, enjoy peace for eternity' (v. 33). Their blood will return upon Joab's head (v. 32)—the punishment for spilling innocent blood will be on his head, as David says after the death of Abner: 'let it fall upon the head of Joab' (2 Sam. 3.29) as a result of his causing the murder of Abner. And David uses similar language to Saul's killer: ' thy blood be upon thy head'(2 Sam. 1.16).8 Because he slew two men, more upright and better than he—the author seeks to demonstrate, by comparing this with v. 25 in this chapter, that both David and Solomon acted in accordance with the principle of recompense. Those who debase the king's honour and violate his authority will be punished, while those who please him will benefit from his goodwill.9 The rule followed therefore is: recompense a man for his ways and for the fruits of his deeds. The justice of the sentence 7. LXX reads (thou mayst take away this day), possibly because what the biblical author intended to say is said for him by the author of LXX. Therefore there is a textual comparison between what is said in vv. 24, 26, 37 and 42, in which the words 'this day' appear in order to indicate the decisive nature of Solomon's decree. Cf. De Vries (1975: 224). 8. Cf. Josh. 2.19; Judg. 9.57; 2 Sam. 16.8; Ezek. 33.4. 9. The desecrators, e.g., Shimei. Those who act well, e.g. Barzelai.

44

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

imposed by the king is reflected in the implementation of the principle of measure for measure which finds its expression through the repetition of a word, in the description of the crime and also in the punishment for it. The author wishes to demonstrate that Solomon acted correctly by applying this principle when ordering Benaiah to strike Joab down10 by using the key words that connect the punishment to the crime: 'and strike him down' (v. 31)—'because he slew two men' (v. 32)—'and struck him down'. He who harms his fellow man is harmed in return. The author refers to the two murdered commanders as more upright and better than Joab, alluding to his (Joab's) character and his qualities and only then does he mention them by name and rank: the commander of the army of Israel and the commander of the army of Judah (in contrast to 'two commanders of the army of Israel'—in David's testament [v. 5]). Abner is the commander of the army of Israel (1 Sam. 14.50, 2 Sam. 3.6). Amasa was called the commander of the army of Judah because the king instructed him to assemble the people of Judah at the time of Sheva ben Bichri's revolt (2 Sam. 20.4-5), when he was already the commander of the army in practice. and he killed them with the sword without my father David knowing it—Solomon's verdict against Joab is written in the plural 'and he killed them with a sword' (v. 32), that is Abner and Amasa. The phrase 'without my father David knowing it' is a quotation taken from the episode involving Abner's murder (cf. Zalevski 1981: 102). When Joab dispatches messengers to Abner to bring him back to Hebron, without David's knowledge or agreement, the text indicates this 'without David knowing' (2 Sam. 3.26). David's lack of information is of significance to the course of the plot. It possesses importance of the first order with regard to the moral image which he projects (and for this reason is placed at the centre of the pattern): his ignorance clears him of any blame for the murder of the army commanders, while placing the guilt squarely on the shoulders of Joab, who killed the commanders without instructions from the king, and this spilling of blood 10. As in David's testament: 'What Joab did to me' (5). 'Do therefore according to thy wisdom' (6). 'And shed the blood of war in peace—and let not his hoar head go down to She'ol in peace' (5-6). As David says after the murder of Abner: 'And these men ... are too hard for me: the Lord shall reward the doer of evil according to his wickedness' (2 Sam. 3.39) in accordance with 'As he has done so shall it be done to him' (Lev. 24.19).

2. Decree and Implementation

45

constitutes a pretext for Joab's murder at the behest of Solomon.11 Possibly this affront to David ('and from my father's house') is connected to his desire to preserve his own innocence, which becomes apparent from his attitude to Saul (1 Sam. 24.5-7; 26.11). The nation too, might suspect12 David, of having a part in killing Abner and Amasa, two hostile army commanders, who had served Saul and Absalom in the past. Their blood will return upon Joab's head and his seed for all time (v. 33)—This phrase bears strong resemblance to the language used by David in cursing Joab after Abner's murder (2 Sam. 3.28-29).13 This curse becomes reality here. God's retribution has been delayed but ultimately not denied. While in v. 32, it is indicated that 'he will cause his blood to return upon his head' in the following verse it is written, 'their blood will return upon Joab's head and his seed for all time'. What is the actual difference between them? When at first Solomon speaks of Joab's punishment, after he has mentioned that 'he spilt innocent blood' (v. 31), he does not give details of the victims, but when he has specified Joab's deeds and declared the names of the slain he proceeds to curse Joab's seed after him with the vilest of curses, not only him but also his seed after him (cf. Malbim 1961). Another way in which to explain these parallels in Solomon's curse is possibly through the pronouncement of the verdict (Mirsky 1987: 180-81). The sentence of death passed by the king on Joab14 consists of four components: (a)

The pronouncement of judgment: 'and the king said unto him do as he has spoken and strike him down, but bury him' (v.Sla).

11. Bar-Efrat 1980: 86. Cf. Whitelam 1979: 106, 109; Long 1984: 54-55; McCarter 1984: 121. 12. Cf. Abarbanel who says as follows: 'Behold he says "And David my father knew it not", as there were many who believed that Joab had murdered Abner because he was commanded by David, David was exceedingly saddened by this as he said: "For all the people and all Israel understood that day that the slaying of Abner the son of Ner did not come from the King" ' (2 Sam. 3.37). 13. Rabbi Judah said in the name of Rav: 'All the curses which David had laid upon the head of Joab were inflicted on his own offspring.' 14. A sentence, similar in structure, was passed by Solomon on Shimi (in this chapter, vv. 42-46): a sentence of death—42; the reason for the judgment—44a; a curse (44b): 'And the Lord shall return your wickedness on your head' (as in 31, with a change of person and wording: his blood—your wickedness).

46

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets (b) (c) (d)

The rationale behind the passing of the sentence: 'and you will remove the innocent blood that Joab has shed' (vv. 31b-32a). The curse on the one sentenced: 'and the Lord will cause his blood to return upon his head' (vv. 32b-33a). The blessing on the king who has judged, on his kingdom and his house: 'unto David and his seed and his house ... there will be peace' (v. 33b).

There is a significant split in the elements that comprise this sentence in that they are intertwined one with the other and also interrupt one another. The reason appears in vv. 31-32, and these are interrupted by the curse. The curse, too, is written over two verses (32-33) and they are interrupted by the stated reason for the passing of the sentence. The explanation for this 'revolving' style is as follows. Solomon commences with the pronouncement of sentence on Joab, 'I will remove the innocent blood that Joab shed ... of my Father' (v. 31). As Solomon mentions the act of spilling blood, by Joab, the curse springs to his lips there and then, because of the killing, so that by this he will be quit of his debt to the Lord by spilling Joab's blood, and he interrupts the rationale for the killing and pronounces a curse 'and the Lord will cause his blood to return on his head' (v. 32). The pronouncement of the curse prompts him to return to the pretext for the killing, which he interrupted previously, and he decides to complete it. He says, 'because he slew two men better ... Judah' (v. 32 ). On completion of the giving of the reason he returns to the curse with which he commenced, but he does not complete it in v. 33 and, when he does, he repeats his opening words. This conforms with biblical style where an interlocutor starts speaking and interrupts the flow of words. When he returns to the commencement of his utterance he repeats some of the words contained in the opening pronouncement,15 just as he does here, repeating 'their blood will return on Joab's head and his seed for all time' (v. 33). Despite the fact that these two issues, the reason and the curse, are intertwined they do not become entangled haphazardly, but are systematically linked together by various bonds (Mirsky 1987: 180-81). It would appear that the latter explanation is preferable to the former.16 Whatever the case, the split elements of the curse are situated 15. Cf., e.g., Gen. 37.36-39.1, where the narrative concerning Judah and Tamar (ch. 38) is in the middle. 16. It is worth noting that there are clear differences between and

2. Decree and Implementation

47

opposite one another, bound by a somewhat broader connection, like the two parallel elements of the pivot pattern of Solomon's decree and its implementation (see below). Solomon blesses his father and his father's seed in contradistinction to the curse which he pronounces on Joab and his progeny. Joab is cursed, both he and his offspring, for all time . David and his generations on the other hand are blessed with peace for eternity . Having cursed Joab and his seed he hastens to bless David and his seed, and perhaps 'if the guilt still rested on David's head, why did they not slay them during his lifetime, and that is why Solomon prays to God about him saying, "to David and his seed ... peace'" (Abarbanel 1520), possibly because the blessing is attached to the curse as part of the verdict. But on David and his seed, and on his house, and his throne, may there be peace from the Lord for eternity—The word 'peace', too, like other words, is linked with the testament of David, with the story of Abner's murder and, in this instance, with the account of Amasa's slaying. It also fulfils the role of measure for measure, and this is the case too in vv. 21, 22, 23 and 24 in the chapter under discussion. We can learn, by comparing the version in v. 33 with the expression in 1 Kgs 2.45—'and the throne of David shall be established ' and not 'will be peace '—that the version in v. 33 is not the accepted one, and the use of the word 'peace' both in David's testament as well as in its implementation by Solomon in his utterances is intentional, considered and connected with the peace motif in the saga of Abner's death (Zalevski 1981). from the Lord forever—Solomon stresses that the curse emanates from the Lord, 'and the Lord will cause his blood to return upon his head' (v. 32), and that the blessing of David also issues from the Lord, 'But may David and his seed ... enjoy peace ... from the Lord' (v. 33).n This expression, also, is connected with the description of Abner's murder (2 Sam. 3.28). Everything that is achieved or that happens happens by his will. It is abundantly clear that the vengeance in the former both verb and noun are singular and the verb is in the causative (hiphil) conjugation, whereas in the latter both verb and noun are plural and the verb is in the simple action (qal) conjugation. 17. Cf. 1 Kgs 12.15: 'So that the King hearkened not to the people; for it was so brought about by the Lord', as well as in Ruth 2.12: 'And may a full reward be given thee by the Lord', etc.

48

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

wrought on those involved, as well as the appointment of Solomon as king, are directly reliant on the promise of the Lord to David and his seed. Benaiah, son ofJehoiada, went up,18 struck him down and killed him (v. 34)—Solomon's instruction was 'go and strike him down' (v. 29). Regarding Benaiah's first attempt, it is said, 'and Benaia came ' (v. 30), and of the second attempt, it is said 'and Benaia went up '. This twofold alteration is accepted in biblical literary tradition, and especially in the decree and implementation formula: 'Go ... and they arose ... and they came' (Num. 22.13-14) and 'Go ... to return, to come' (1 Kgs 13.15-16).19 'And he went up' is parallel to 1.53: 'And they took him down from the altar.' Benaiah carries out the sentence, and strikes Joab down and kills him.20 The description of his slaying is formed by a linguistic accord between the command 'and strike him down and bury him' (v. 31) and 'and he struck him down and killed him, and buried him' (v. 34). But 'and killed him' does not appear initially, possibly to soften the instruction with regard to a military commander and a great man of Israel. Possibly, too, the author connects Joab's words 'No, for I shall die here' (v. 30) to the deed of Benaiah, 'And he struck him down and killed him ' (v. 34). Joab, the military leader, loyal to David throughout his life, does not merit the comforting accorded to Adonijah (1.53) and dies, a murderer by intent, next to the cornices of the altar. He is buried in his house. LXX (LV) and the Peshitta have 'in his grave', apparently on the assumption that it would not have been possible for him to have a house in the desert. But the change is not acceptable. Samuel was also buried in his house (1 Sam. 25.1)—next to his house.21 In the section under discussion, the decree of Solomon and its implementation constitute a pivot pattern, comprising mainly the words of Solomon and to a lesser extent their implementation by Benaiah. As 18. In the Hexapla the following words are deleted 'went up ... Johoiada' for no reason, in that after Solomon's extended speech the implementor of the action is sought there. 19. Kravitz (1971: 10). There are changes in the verbs indicating movement. 20. Abarbanel's opinion is not acceptable according to the sages—that because Benaia was a priest he was not defiled by corpses, that he did not kill Joab and his followers but that this was done by his messengers, and that because they died at his behest the text ascribes their death to him. 21. For additional suggestions for overcoming the difficulties see Frisch 1986: 208 nn. 173, 174.

2. Decree and Implementation

49

in the case with other biblical narratives, description of the action is limited, whereas the use of direct speech is extensive (cf. Long 1984: 55). The direct speech expresses the idea of measure for measure (Fokkelman 1981: 402-403) in which there exists a balance between the crime and its punishment. The whole issue finds its expression in the pivot pattern. I find the decree and its implementation at the commencement and at the conclusion. But the decree contains three verbs and the implementation has four. Amongst the verbs added are the words 'and killed him' which do not appear in what Solomon says. The absence of separation between decree and implementation, with the exception of the instruction, indicate that the matter was executed speedily. In the second line there is an antithesis rather than a parallel as in the other elements. Positive actions are manifested here: initially by Solomon, the elucidation of the evil, the spilling of blood, the harm done to his father's house, in contradistinction to the blessing of peace which will descend on David and his seed forever. In the third line of the structure there are parallels between the curses hurled at Joab, initially a curse on Joab—where the Lord is the subject of the sentence—that his blood will be caused to return upon his head and, after detailing Joab's deeds, the curse on Joab and his seed forever. Here, the blood of the murdered officers, Abner and Amasa, is being considered. The words 'return' , 'head' and 'blood' > are repeated in both lines. Because of the concept of measure for measure, found frequently in this particular literary unit, as I have indicated above, I have discovered parallels between lines in close proximity. In the second line is innocent blood (that of the commanders of the army) as opposed to the blood of Joab. In the seventh and eight lines the curse on Joab's seed forever occurs against the blessing on David's seed forever . The name of the Lord also links the blessing to the curse: the Lord will retaliate against Joab, in the third line, and, in the eighth line, the blessing from the Lord. In the fourth and fifth lines is found a parallel between the striking down by Joab of two upright people, better than he, with details of their names and their rank, at considerable length, with the addition of the particle before each of their names in order to indicate the importance of each one as an individual22 and the magnitude of their loss. In the fourth line Solomon says that Joab harmed the two men, but in the fifth, at the climax of the pattern, the words 'and he killed 22. Cf.'Thou shall honour

thy father and

thy mother'(Exod. 20.12).

50

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

them '23 with the sword, appear. In the three lines, at the climax of the pattern and on both its sides, the awful fact of Joab's slaying of two great officers in Israel is emphasized, as David states to his servants, after Abner's murder: 'Know ye not that there is a prince and a great man fallen this day in Israel' (2 Sam. 3.38). At the pivot of the pattern, 'Without my father24 David knowing', he joins his father's name to his for emphasis—both these men were murdered without his father's knowledge,25 a clear emphasis on his father's innocence. These issues appear at the climax of the pattern in order to exonerate both David and Solomon. With regard to the slaying of Joab as being with good reason, that he performed his heinous deeds 'and my father David did not know', there was great need for considered and weighty reasons, particularly with Solomon's assumption of rule, when he was not yet sufficiently established, 'a weak and just annointed King' (2 Sam. 3.39). The discovery of the double murder, commited by Joab, would prevent grievances and severe criticism by the nation at the elimination of an officer so honoured and so crowned with victory in the past. In reply to the debate as to whether the punishment of a respected and loyal officer such as he was is justified, the author states his opinion, with abundant clarity, that Joab's punishment is indeed justified; and this is recognized in the pivot pattern, of which the climax emphasizes the innocence of King David: Without my father David knowing it. 3. The Judaean Man of God's Words to the King and God's Words to Him (1 Kings 13.8-9, 16-17, 22)26 The Judaean Man of God's Response to the King of Israel—Yaravam (vv. 8-9) A

I will not go with thee neither will I eat bread nor drink water in this place X for so it was charged me by the word of the Lord saying B' Eat no bread nor drink water A' nor return by the same way that thou earnest B

23. 24. father: 25. 26.

To indicate, that to kill is more serious than to strike down, as mentioned. We have already stressed the fact that Solomon frequently mentions his my father, my father David, David. Cf. 2 Sam. 3.26: 'And David knew it not.' Cf. Dozeman 1982: 384-87.

2. Decree and Implementation

51

The Judaean Man of God's Response to the Prophet from Bet-El (vv. 16-17) A

I may not return with thee, nor go in with thee neither will I eat bread nor drink water with thee in this place X for it was said to me by the word of the Lord B' thou shalt eat no bread nor drink water A' nor turn again by the way thou earnest B

The Word of the Lord to the Judaean Man (v. 22) A

but earnest back and hast eaten bread and drunk water X in the place of which He did say to thee B' Eat no bread and drink no water A' Thy carcass shall not come to the tomb of thy father B

The above is not a conventional pivot pattern, as it is repeated (almost word for word) three times in vv. 8-9, 16-17, 22 and links two parts of the chapter. However, it seems that this threefold repetition (particularly the decree which is repeated three times) and specifically its subtle differences, teaches us a great deal. The opinion that 'the prolixity of the narrative stems from a tiresome use of the principle of repetition without any artistic purpose' (Uffenheimer 1973: 170) is totally invalid. In the first two structures we find the words of the man of God: in the first instance to the king and in the second to the prophet from Bet-El. On the third occasion it is the Lord who speaks to the man of God. In each example there are seven components: the first three describe the man of God's actions (or the expression of his refusal to act) in parallel with the three last elements in which the prohibitions placed upon him are enumerated. This represents an example of a decree and its implementation, but in reverse order: first the implementation, or lack thereof, and finally the decree, the prohibition. At the centre of the structure is the word of the Lord, which is the principal topic of this chapter and which is reflected, in particular, in the structures cited above. The first of these structures opens with the response of the man of God to the king's invitation to dine with him at the palace in v. 7: 7 will not go with thee' (v. 8). These words parallel the prohibition

52

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

imposed by the Lord as it is stated in the hemistich at the conclusion of the pericope 'nor return21 by the same way that thou earnest' (v. 9). The link between the expressions 'go' and 'return' appears in parallel in affairs involving decree and implementation (Kravitz 1971: 27) (Num. 23.16-17: [return] and [and he camel) as well as in other pivot patterns (Judg. 9.56-57; 2 Kgs 5.8-15).28 In this example the decree appears at the conclusion, because the man of God quotes the prohibition only after he obeys the Lord as he commands him. The reason for the change expressed in the complete refusal emerges from the attitude of the man of God to Jeroboam. In the restriction 'not to return' the Lord intimates to him that he should not listen to those who attempt to turn him from the way back 'to this place' (v. 8), but the reason for these restraints is not elaborated on in the text. Apparently the major burden of the restriction is on returning to Bet-El after he had left it (Rofe 1982: 148). The prohibition placed on the man of God constitutes an integral part of the prophetic sign, just as the prohibition on eating and drinking is an actualization of the Lord's profound rejection of Bet-El, and gives concrete form to the finality and decisiveness of his judgment concerning the altar there (vv. 2-3). The man of God fulfils the word of the Lord by following 'another path' (v. 10). As evidence of the inseparable bond which exists between the messenger and the message, between the prophet and the prophecy, it is certain that when the emissary cannot be turned back whence he came neither can his message (Simon 1976: 175). In the second and third hemistichoi, we find the restriction on eating bread and drinking water, in parallel with that stated in the decree of the Lord in the hemistichoi on the other side of the structure (v. 9). But here the man of God adds 'in this place' (v. 8), without its being repeated in the decree, and prior to this he abbreviates the statement 'nor return by the same way that thou earnest' in contrast to 'I will not go with thee'. It would seem that he shortens the statement and does not say 'the same way that thou earnest' because this is obvious from the phrase 'I will not go with thee'. Therefore the addition of 'in this place' implies contempt for the loathsomeness of the idolatory (12.2833), and consequently he does not mention the actual name of the place. 27. The words and ('return' and 'way') are repeated a number of times in this chapter. 28. See the appropriate chapters in this study.

2. Decree and Implementation

53

The restriction on eating bread and drinking water is an expression of the total severing of contact with 'this place', and is a blunt rejection of any possibility of influencing the man of God.29 There would be no possibility of acceding to the request of a sinful king to dine at his table, so that he would be purged of his sin, so to speak. Apparently the prohibition is linked with the substance of the mission to Jeroboam, and therefore the tone of the rejection of the invitation 'I will not go with thee' (v. 8) is even harsher. At the centre of the structure we find the source of the authority for his actions or for his refusal to act: 'for so was it charged me30 by the word of the Lord saying' (v. 9). The word of the Lord is situated at the centre of the structure, as it is situated at the centre of the other two structures, and it constitutes the key expressions in this section (vv. 1, 2, 3, 5, 9, 17, 18 and 32). The obedience of the man of God which finds its expression in the almost perfect parallelism between the decree and its implementation, stems from the decree being 'by the word of the Lord' (possibly by means of an angel, as in v. 18). Here also, as in other pivot patterns (e.g. 1 Kgs 17.2-7), the Lord is situated at the pivot of the structure, demonstrating his power and his authority. At the very foundation of the various meanings of prophecy rests the idea of the power of the word of God. The word of the Lord foretells the future and shapes it and as a result of this it is not liable to change. In this section of the text the word of the Lord serves to warn the prophet, and the word of the Lord is realized absolutely.31 There is a direct connection between the word of the Lord and history, and this approach is elucidated in the example under discussion (cf. von Rad 1956: 78). In the second structure, in vv. 16-17, we find the words of the man of God to the prophet from Bet-El, and they are almost identical with his utterances to Jeroboam. The prophet, like Jeroboam, invites him to dine at his table. Once again the nuanced differences between the two structures are worthy of note.

29. Simon 1976: 173. Cf. this threefold prohibition with the prohibition on Jer. (16.1-13). 30. There are those researchers who change this to (in pual). Cf. Burney's (1970b) commentary. 31. Cf. Seeligman 1992c: 205-206.

54

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

In speaking to the prophet he repeats the expression 'with you three times, and this doubling and trebling of the phrase 'with you' equals precisely the number of prohibitions placed upon him 'to return32 with thee and to go with thee33 nor drink water with thee'.34 Despite his refusal, the language which he uses in addressing the prophet is polite, whereas when the king asks he speaks to him brusquely. This is obvious from his style of speech. He says to the king, 'I will not go with thee'—a brief rebuttal. Whereas he says to the prophet, 'I may not return with thee nor go in with thee',35 that is, a form of excuse and even regret are discernable in his words. And he adds 'to return' in contrast to 'nor turn again', in the conclusion, a complete parallel, with the exception of the parallelism (go)(return), as mentioned. He adds variation by saying 'nor drink water there' and 'by the way thou earnest'. It becomes apparent that the major difference between the language of the man of God's refusal to the prophet and the language which he employs in rejecting the king's invitation finds its expression in the pivot of the structure. In his words to the king he says, 'For so was it charged me by the word of the Lord saying' (v. 9), whereas his words to the prophet are 'for it was said36 to me by the word of the Lord' (v. 17). Apparently, this less decisive language ('neither will I eat bread with thee') by the man of God to the prophet is used in order to lessen the harshness of the decree commanded by the Lord. He tells the king that he has been instructed by God, but he says, 'the Lord spoke to me', to the prophet.37 By changing an imperative to a statement he displays his 32. In v. 8 it is stated 'I shall come with thee', for stylistic variation. 33. This expression is omitted in LXX, see above. In the Peshitta occurs 'to come to your house' and Tur-Sinai 1965 reads 'to your house'. 34. Possibly the alteration results from the fact that the elderly prophet takes water and offers it to him so that he will drink it. 35. Compare LXX version and the Hexapla translation: 'And you shall not return there.' 36. The LXX LV, the Vulgate, the Peshitta and the Targum have and this is the case with many of the commentators as well. 37. This change brings to mind the episode with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. They too were prohibited from eating and they too transgressed. The woman in speaking to the serpent radically alters what has been commanded her in the divine decree, just as the man of God does in this narrative, changing it into a mere statement. Cf. 'And the Lord God commanded the man saying, "Of every tree

2. Decree and Implementation

55

weakness and hints at what will take place in the future, that he will not comply with the decision nor will he obey the word of God, despite the fact that for the time being he refuses to accede to the request of the prophet. But his position has become attenuated. There is therefore a distinct gradation: the twofold repetition of 'refuse' and on the third occasion agreement and acceptance of the invitation to eat and drink.38 On the first occasion the refusal is emphatic. On the second his refusal displays a weakening and a loss of force, and on the third occasion he accepts. From this it is clear, too, why the structure is repeated three times.39 In the third structure (v. 22) there are many more changes than in the first and second structures, despite the parallelism in them. There is a definite reason for this: it is not the man of God who is speaking here, but it is he who is being addressed by the Lord. But more than this: these words come in the wake of a change in his status, in that he is in breach of the prohibition to eat or drink. This is why the actions of the man of God (and not his refusals) are presented at the start, because the Lord speaks to him not in negative but in positive terms. All this is expressed with great brevity and with a small number of words essential for conveying the meaning: 'and return' , 'and eat' 40 'bread' , 'and drink' 'water' . The parallel of 'and you will return' in the words of the man of God to the prophet is: 'I may not return.' The word 'go' as in the first and second structures is not used, and it is not written. The words 'in this place' do not appear after 'nor drink water' (as in the first two structures), but 'in the place where he spoke to thee'. Possibly this is

of the garden thou mayst freely eat... thou shalt not eat it"' (Gen. 2.16-17), while the woman in speaking to the serpent says, 'but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, "You shall not eat of it" ' (3.2-3). 38. In the opinion of one of the commentators, the midday meal was more important to him than the word of the Lord. 39. The model in which the climax appears in the third repetition is frequently found in Scripture, an example of this being Joab's refusal on two occasions to send Ahima'az to announce Absalom's death to David (his refusal becomes weaker on the second occasion too), and in the third instance he responds by sending him (2 Sam. 18.19-23). This occurs too in the incident with Balaam (Num. 22). Cf. Zakovitch 1979. 40. Attention should be given to the words 'ate bread, drank water', which recur invv. 18, 19, 23 as well.

56

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

to emphasize the transgression. Not paying attention to 'this place' is in the form of an insult, which the man of God emphasizes. A very clear difference emerges in the parallel between the opening and the conclusion. The order in the first and second structures appears as follows: go—return return/go—turn again. In the third structure the order is reversed. The negative action of returning41 is mentioned initially and finally as 'you will not go\ in accord with the previous version, but in the form 'thy carcass shall not come42 to the tomb of thy father'. The verb 'come' is not the predicate of the man of God, but of his carcass. And the matter is not delayed in coming (v. 24). His punishment is delivered as a measure for measure: he disregards the commandment of the Lord which prohibited him from returning to Bet-El, and therefore his punishment is to be buried there (v. 30; Cf. Deut. 28.26). It is worth noting that the prohibition as spoken by the Lord employs the word 'not' (three times 9, 17), and in v. 22 'eat no bread and drink no water' It would seem that the man of God stresses the prohibition with the word 'not',43 in a desire to prevent himself from transgressing it. A perfect parallelism is created in the pattern between the prohibition and its implementation by the use of the word 'not': a threefold use of the word 'not' opposite a threefold use of the word 'not' on both sides of the pivot. The words of the Lord begin positively without the use of the word 'not', in order to indicate commission of a sin by the son of the man of God and therefore the use of the word in Hebrew, instead of the word . But in indicating the punishment in the final element of the structure (v. 22), as distinct from the prohibition, the word is used (rather than ) followed by the word (thou shalt come) for emphasis and to distinguish between the actions. At the centre of the pattern there is a bridge passage between the negative action and the prohibition: 'in the place in which he did say to thee'. That is to say the word of the Lord is associated with the place, because of its importance, and even 'according to the word of the Lord' is a statement and not a decree , unlike that which was said 41. This surprising variation in an iterative model occurs in the pivot pattern 2 Sam. 3.24-25: 'and he is gone in peace'—'and he is quite gone'. 42. Malbim's interpretation (1961) of 'and you shall return' as an auxiliary verb to 'you shall eat' and not as an independent verb does not appear to be acceptable. 43. Cf. the Decalogue—an emphatic imperative: Thou shalt not kill' (Exod. 20.13-14).

2. Decree and Implementation

57

by the man of God to the king. The name of the Lord is deleted here, because he in fact is the interlocutor. The word of the Lord (vv. 9, 17, 22) is at the centre of the pattern and its centrality serves to prove its transcendence over those who transmit it and its ascendancy over its adversaries (Simon 1976: 171). The word of the Lord transcends the actions of men, whoever they may be, even if they are prophets (Long 1984: 149). In addition to this, the pivot pattern and its climax imply that the prophet is subject to the commandment of punctiliously observing the word of the Lord without the involvement of instructions from another prophet. And he who does not obey receives swift retribution. Even a prophet sent at the behest of the Lord (v. 10) is liable to fail. The prophet is bound to conduct his mission, even if it is based on divine revelation, without interference from his peers, so to speak (Uffenheimer 1973). It would seem that a similarity between the man of God and Jeroboam is discernible here, and the phrase 'return by the way' that links the two proves this. The man of God returns (from a physical point of view) (on the way) (v. 19) despite the divine prohibition. Jeroboam does not turn44 from his evil ways. His lack of compliance with the word of God brings about retribution of a frightful kind. This then is the destiny of the man of God. 4. God's Instruction to Elijah to Hide in Wadi Cherith (1 Kings 17.2-7) A

And the word of the Lord came to him, saying, Go from here and turn eastward, and hide thyself by the Wadi Cherith that is east of the Jordan. B And it shall be, that thou shall drink of the wadi; C and I have commanded the ravens to feed thee there. X So he went and did according to the word of the Lord: for he went and dwelt by the Wadi Cherith which is east of the Jordan. C' And the ravens brought him bread and meat in the morning and bread and meat in the evening. B' And he drank of the wadi. A1 And it came to pass after a while that the wadi dried up because there was no rain in the land.

44. Metaphorically. Note should be taken of that which is stated in v. 6.

(v. 2) (v. 3) (v. 4)

(v. 5)

(v. 6) (v. 7)

58

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

This section is concerned with Elijah concealing himself at the rivulet of Cherith according to the instructions of the Lord. The opening of the section begins with the words 'and the word of the Lord', which are characteristic of the opening of a section. The section concludes with v. 7,45 but the next section also opens with v. 7. That is to say there is here what is termed a 'hung' conclusion.46 Verse 1 does not belong to the section but it is situated at the beginning of the chapter, as an introduction that conveys to the reader Elijah's words, which are connected to the issue of the drought—which is the central concern of chs. 17 and 18 (the commencement of the story tells of the cessation of the rain and its conclusion, tells of the coming of the rain, 18.45). In vv. 2-7 the divine decree and its implementation are stated. And the word of the Lord came to him (v. 2)47—This opening phrase is commonly used as an introduction to prophecy and serves to indicate the commencement of prophetic utterances (Jer. 13.8, 16.1, for instance). It is used here with intention and with emphasis in conjunction with the phrase: 'and Elijah said but by my words ...' That is to say, the word of the Lord spoken by the prophet. This is highlighted in order to emphasize that, 'but according to my word' represents 'and the word of the Lord came to him saying'. This indicates that from the beginning of the episode involving Elijah, it is the word of the Lord and not the independent utterances of his emissary that is paramount. The power of the word of the Lord and the degree to which it is obeyed constitute the central motif which blends the episodes one with another (vv. 2, 5, 8, 14, 16, 24) (Simon 1976: 75). Go from here, and turn eastward, and hide thyself by the Wadi Cherith that is east of the Jordan (v. 3)—The Lord commands Elijah to leave the place where he is and go48 to conceal himself. It is not written that Elijah fled to the rivulet of Cherith because he sensed danger, but 45. But not in v. 6. Culley (1976: 63) divides 7-16. But on p. 97, v. 7 is attached to the previous section. Long (1984: 197) perceives an introduction to the narrative in v. 7, a bridging verse, so to speak (p. 181), that accelerates the action of the second scene. Cf. Simon (1980: 52) who sees a clearly defined episode consisting of vv. 2-7 inclusive. See Chapter 7 section 2. 46. The terminology was determined by Zakovitch (1982a: 74). 47. Possibly the intention was to present the words of the prophet in direct form in contrast to the editor's version. Cf. Koch (1964: 225) who maintains that v. 2 constitutes a textual introduction to the Elijah narratives. 48. The act of walking represents a repetitive in motif in the Elijah narratives. Cf. Buber 1961:73.

2. Decree and Implementation

59

he went there because he was compelled to do so on God's instruction (Simon 1976: 66). Elijah is commanded to turn eastwards, that is to say, to go in a specific direction49 in order to conceal himself. by the Wadi Cherith—Wadi Cherith is apparently one of the tributaries of Wadi Jabesh.50 It is apparent that Jabesh and Cherith are synonyms.51 For the connection between the roots which constitute a word pair, see: 'neither let the eunuch say. Behold I am a tree that is withered ', and 'I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not wither ' (Isa. 56.3, 5). And it shall be, that thou shall drink of the wadi;52 and I have commanded the ravens to feed thee there (v. 4)—In this verse the Lord informs the prophet what the source of his sustenance will be. Water will be available to him from the wadi. Bread and meat will be brought to him by the ravens, and they will provide for him. And he is not called upon to burden himself at all. He does as he is told and does not implement anything on his own initiative. He accepts what is commanded him without demur. His reaction is not conveyed. He has total obedience to the Lord. So he went and did53 according to the word of the Lord: for he went and dwelt by the Wadi Cherith which is east of the Jordan (v. 5)— Elijah's complete compliance is highlighted by the absence of anything intervening between 'go' and 'and he went' (other than the decree, as in the story of Abraham, Gen. 12.1) and also by the frequent use of the verb 'to go' :54 'Go from here'—so he went according to the

49. 'And turn'—is omitted from LXX and has apparently been deleted, in that, as mentioned, these words have significance with regard to the change in direction. 50. Cf. Ehrlich 1900. N. Gluck (1949: 90-91) supports his opinion, but has reservations regarding the location of Wadi Cherith 'which is on the Jordan', by proving that the wadi was east of the Jordan C = 'to the east of—cf. Gen. 2.8; 23.17, 19); and Naor (1954: 285) shares this opinion. 51. Cf. Garsiel 1989: 153. Additional parallelisms are presented in the concluding Chapter 7 p. 265 52. LXX adds 'water' but there seems to be no need for this. This is the case too in v. 6 and in Judg. 7.5 and 1 Kgs 13.23. 53. 'And did' is omitted in LXX, LV. There seems to be no need for this because there is 'and she went and did' (v. 15) etc. in the next passage. 54. 'And he went' is omitted in the Hexapla, seemingly without reason. Possibly because of the second 'and he went', it would appear that the repetition of the verb 'and he went' has special significance, as mentioned.

60

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

word of the Lord; 'for he went and dwelt55 by the Wadi Cherith' (the general followed by the particular). But it would seem that this obedience is emphasized with great weight by the almost identical repetition which exists in the decree and its implementation: 'Go from here and turn56 eastward and hide thyself by the Wadi Cherith that is east of the Jordan' (v. 3). 'So he went and did according to the word of the Lord: for he went and dwelt by the Wadi Cherith which is east of the Jordan' (v. 5). The remark 'which is east of the Jordan' (v. 5), which at first sight seems to be redundant because the place is adequately identified by what is stated in the decree (v. 3), appears, in my opinion, to stress Elijah's exceptional obedience, in that he went to the place which is specified in the decree. It may also serve to emphasize that there was still water in the Jordan. This does not occur in the other decrees. The prophet obeys, but the completeness of the repetition is unparalleled.57 So in the parallel story, for example, the prophet is commanded 'Arise, go to Zarephat, which belongs to Zidon' (v. 9) and the prophet obeys, 'and he arose, and went to Zarephat' (v. 10). From this the conclusion is that the author stresses the prophet's obedience in two ways: by a simple statement ('and he did according to the word of the Lord') and also by extended parallelism between the decree and its implementation (cf. Simon 1976: 66-67). The alacrity with which he acts is expressed by the lack of anything intervening between the command 'Go' and its implementation 'and he wenf. That is to say that the commandment of the Lord is carried out, not only to the letter but also with due speed.58 55. The version 'go and turn' changes to 'and he went and he dwelt... and he went and he dwelt', which accords with the accepted changes in Scripture between the decree and its implementation. The final outcome 'and he dwelt' is described here. Cf. Kravitz 1971: 15. 56. A command + 'go' is found in Gen. 22.2, 27.43, Cant. 2.17. Possibly the connotation being 'for your own good', as Rashi comments on Gen. 12.1. 57. See the references above, possibly excluding the comparison, 'Go appear before Ahab ... Elijah went to appear before Ahab' (18.1-2), possibly to stress the courage (and lack of fear) involved in standing before him. In all the other instances there is no precise correlation. E.g. 19.11, 13, 'upon the mountain before the Lord' is omitted; 19.15, 19, 'the Wilderness of Damascus' is omitted; 21.18, 'Rise up, go down to meet Ahab' is omitted, etc. 58. Cf. 'Let there be light—and there was light' (Gen. 1.3)—Speedily without interposed words.

2. Decree and Implementation

61

In the parallelisms which have been mentioned there is an apparent contradiction. Elijah is commanded 'and hide thyself by the Wadi Cherith' (v. 3), but he 'dwelt by the Wadi Cherith' (v. 5). Why this alteration? There are those of the opinion that 'and hide thyself '—'and he dwelt ' are in fact the same thing and merely add variety to the language. However, this does not appear to be the case to me. There is, after all, a significant difference between the verb 'and hide thyself—which implies fear and concealment—and 'he dwelt'— which indicates secure settlement. It would seem that the change stems from something else which is connected to the key word in the pivot pattern under discussion. Elijah is commanded to conceal himself but in fact he is not behaving like a fugitive who hides away, but he actually dwells openly.59 By describing it thus the author indicates that Elijah trusts in the Lord and does not hide away. He feels completely secure in this distant place. And the ravens brought him bread and meat in the morning and bread and meat in the evening and he drank from the wadi (v. 6)—The word 'to provide for you' (v. 4) is interpreted here as bread and meat. If the MT is accepted,60 then there is an emphasis on the provision of meat and bread, in that Elijah is given both in the morning and in the evening by the emissaries of God—the ravens. Parallel with 'I have commanded the ravens' is the ravens 'brought', a word which indicates their activity over an extended period of time (Burney (1970[b]). Thus also 'will drink' implies an on-going activity. The bringing of the provender by the ravens proves that this was at the Lord's behest. I draw the conclusion, therefore, that many of the emissaries of the Lord perform their missions consciously and unconciously. And it came to pass after a while that the wadi dried up, because there was no rain in the land (v. 7)—Those who maintain that this is the opening of the next section are correct. I have here a 'hung' 59. If this opinion is accepted (Garsiel 1989: 152-53), that Elijah was from Yabesh and was called Tishbi, because of name derivatives, then there is a clear play on words here: Elijah from Jabesh and the metathesized version ('and he dwelt'). This is linked also to 'and the wadi dried up '. 60. LXX and the Peshitta read as follows: 'and they brought him bread in the morning and meat in the evening'. Many researchers accept this version of the text (e.g. Tur-Sinai 1965). In Exod. 16.8, 12, there is a similar reading. It would seem that the LXX version (which is the principal one) is based on a tradition that attempts to find a parallel between the feeding of Elijah and the feeding of the people of Israel in the desert.

62

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

conclusion, that is the clear conclusion of one section which constitutes the opening of the next section (cf. 2 Kgs 5.8-15). The author concludes with that with which he commences: 'And the word of the Lord and it came to pass after a while'—that is after a year ('days' = a year, Lev. 25.29, etc.). The drought has worsened. Elijah can no longer find sustenance by the grace of the ravens, and the Lord is forced to send him out of the country. The verdict is established 'and the years will pass ... dew and rain other than by my word' (17.1). This makes the Prophet's sentence law (19.10-12) and actually causes him damage. I can answer Malbim's question 'Why did he instruct him initially to dwell by Wadi Cherith and not tell him immediately to leave for Zidon or some other place outside the country?', by saying that the biblical author indicates the severity of the drought in Israel by stages. At the commencement of the structure the wadi is called Cherith. At the conclusion of the structure, it is referred to as wadi without reference to a name. But the verb closest to the word is 'and it [the wadi] dried up ' . I n the light of the discussion concerning the name Wadi Cherith-Jabesh and its location, it would seem that the author conceals the name derivations of Wadi Cherith-Jabesh (which are synonyms in Hebrew) in v. 7.61 Even though Elijah is sustained by the grace of the Lord, he is not cut off from reality. The progressive severity of the drought causes the wadi to dry up, in order to indicate that, in the midst of this miraculous experience, the prophet is not transported from the realm of human existence. As a result of there being no water in the wadi Elijah cannot remain concealed. This section concludes with a clear expectation of the new development:62 Where will Elijah go? This is a narrative containing a decree and its implementation. The first verse contains an introduction, an opening formula and the final verse, a conclusion, leaving the reader anticipating that which is to come. The verses in the middle are the body of the story: in v. 3, the decree of the Lord; in vv. 5-6, the implementation; and at the pivot of the pattern a description of the obedience of the prophet. Possibly the section is constructed in the form of a pivot pattern to emphasize this 61. Garsiel 1989: 153-54. Cf. also: 'go and hide thyself ... to feed thee' (17.4) with 'and hid them ... and fed them bread and water' (18.4), etc. 62. Simon 1980: 68, and cf. additional examples of an open-ended conclusion of this type which arouses expectations, in the auditor, of something to follow: Gen. 37.36, Exod. 1.22 and Judg. 13.20.

2. Decree and Implementation

63

story—the first in a series of tales concerning Elijah—that constitutes an introduction to the great deeds yet to come, the conflict with Ahab and Elijah's war against the worshippers of Ba'al. In v. 3 he is commanded to conceal himself at Wadi Cherith. In v. 7 the Wadi dried up. To this end a parallel is added to the centre of the structure: 'and the wadi dried up ' 'and he dwelt by the wadi' (metathesized 63 consonants). The parallel contributes to the reinforcement, CherithJabesh. The instruction to drink from the wadi precedes the Lord's decree for the sustenance of the prophet by the ravens. And in its implementation, the bringing of the bread and the meat by the ravens precedes the drinking of the water from the wadi64 (and this serves to create the pivot pattern). Why? The word combination 'and you shall drink from the wadi ' occurs initially in the Lord's decree because water is the most essential commodity for the existence of man. Only afterwards is there an allusion to the other foodstuffs included in the verb 'to sustain you '. The issue of the ravens bringing bread and meat to Elijah precedes the issue of the drinking of the water from the wadi in the implementation, because whereas they constitute the miraculous factor, the wadi is naturally filled with water. This order is emphasized in the syntactical structure of the two sentences as well. In the first sentence—'and I have commanded the ravens'—the Lord is the subject of the sentence and the ravens its object. The ravens are activated: the Lord activates. In the implementation, the ravens are the subject of the sentence. They act in accordance with the word of the Lord. While there is no change in the expression 'and he drank of the wadi', the author intends to conclude thus that Elijah drank from the wadi, because this is where the change takes place—the wadi dries up. The sustaining by the ravens includes bread and meat and is situated in parallel with the third line. 63. Metatheses such as these are encountered in many places in Scripture. E.g. 'but he shall flee from the sword and his young men shall become bond slaves' (Isa. 31.8); 'and water springs into dry ground' i Ps. 107.33); 'in their heart is malice: their throat is open sepulchre (Ps. 5.10). 64. In Ugaritic narratives, with the exception of periodic changes in the text of introductions, there is usually complete parallelism without alteration between decree and implementation, in unaltered sequence. See the text in KTU 1.4, 1-51. Asherah agrees to request permission from her husband El to build the temple to Ba'al (Amir 1987: 38).

64

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

In the words parallel to the decree, expression is given to the implementation. This becomes manifest in the long formulaic repetition 'by the Wadi Cherith which is east of the Jordan' as well as in the repetition of 'and he went', which serves to emphasize his going at the Lord's behest. The description of his subservience appears at the centre of the pattern, therefore, and not at its conclusion, forming a perfect parallelism of the elements, as expected, perhaps, where the author is obliged to place the implementation before the manner of sustaining, and not vice versa. The word 'wadi' recurs at the commencement and the conclusion of the section under discussion—as the location of Elijah's settlement, accompanied by the name of the wadi, either in its revealed or concealed form. In the second instance it appears as 'and he drank from the wadi'. At the centre, the implementation of the decree that brings the prophet to the wadi occurs. Its (the wadi's) name appears in order to indicate the complete obedience of the prophet. The issue is expressed in the pivot pattern by inverting the order of the components, implying that the word commanded by God is fulfilled in its entirety! 5. The Healing ofNa 'aman (2 Kings 5.8-15) The following pivot pattern includes a description of Na'aman the commander of the army of Aram meeting with Elisha and his being cured of leprosy. I have included v. 1565 in the structure as well, because this verse opens the section, and at the same time concludes a section (a 'hung' conclusion).66 In this section there are a number of interlocutors: Elisha, Na'aman, the servants and the narrator. But the significant issues are expressed in the words of the main characters, Elisha and Na'aman who commence and conclude the section. It starts with the words of Elisha to the king of Israel: Why hast thou rent thy clothes? Let him come now to me, and he shall know that there is a prophet in Israel—These words of Elisha are spoken against the background of the rending of his clothes by the king of Israel. In contrast to the words of the narrator, in this verse, who calls Elisha by the name 'the man of God', Elisha, apparently 'ignoring' this, says to the king 'and he shall know that there is a prophet in Israel' (cf. Ezek. 2.5, 33.33). He has 65. See divergent opinions: Cohn 1983: 172; Jones 1984: 417. 66. See the analysis in this study of the structure in 1 Kgs 17.2-7 (Chapter 2, section 2).

2. Decree and Implementation

65

'forgotten' his God and speaks like the little girl when she tells her mistress 'with the prophet that is in Samaria' (v. 3). A

he sent to the King saying. Why hast thou rent thy clothes? Let him come now to me, and he shall know that there is a prophet in Israel. (v. 8) B So Na'aman came with his horses and with his chariot, and stood at the door of the house of Elisha. (v. 9) C And Elisha sent a messenger to him, saying. Go and wash in the Jordan seven times and thy flesh shall be restored to thee and thou shall be clean. (v. 10) D But Na'aman was angry, and went away, (v. 11) X and said, Behold, I thought, he will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the Lord his God and wave his hand over the place, and so heal the infected person. Are not Amana and Parpar, rivers of (v. 12) Dammeseq, better than all the waters of Israel? May I not wash in them and be clean ? D1 So he turned and went away in a rage C And his servants came near, and spoke to him, and said, My father, if the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldst thou not have done it? How much rather then, when he says to thee, Wash, and be clearfl Then he went (v. 13) down, and dipped himself seven times in the Jordan, (v. 14) according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh was restored like the flesh of a little child, and he was clean B' And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and came and stood before him: (v. 15) A' and he said, Behold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel.

There is a distinct sign, therefore, of pride displayed by Elisha who places himself at the head of the hierarchy and does not mention the Lord. He does not acknowledge limitations and is apparently not aware that there is power higher than him (Zakovitch 1985: 51, 71). Possibly the utterance of the prophet 'that there is a prophet in Israel' can also be interpreted as opposing the king of Israel who maintained that he (the prophet) was not God (v. 7). It would appear that the prophet reproaches him for not directing Na'aman to him for healing (Keil and Delitzsch 1965; and Jones 1984). He stresses the transition here from the jurisdiction of the king to the jurisdiction of the prophet. The emphasis is placed on the source of the healing, and that is the prophet. The ability of the prophet, juxtaposed with the weakness of the king, serves to

66

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

clarify that the spirit of the Lord rests upon the prophet and not upon the king (Rofe 1982: 110). It is interesting to note that according to the words of Elisha the miracle is not performed to bring a specific advantage, but to exalt and to strengthen the name of the prophet from Israel amongst the gentiles as well. From this point of view the results of the miracle exceed the expectations of the man of God, because in parallel with the utterances of Elisha 'and he will know that there is a prophet in Israel', Na'aman says in the final hemistich in the structure, which parallels the first, after he has been cured of his illness, 'Behold now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel' (v. 15). That is to say, that Na'aman is convinced that there is a God in Israel and not that there is a prophet in Israel (Zakovitch 1985: 75). These words are said by Na'aman in the first dialogue between them, because before that they spoke through the medium of emissaries and not face to face (cf. Cohn 1983: 176). It would seem that the continuation (v. 17) indicates that we are encountering a declaration of monotheism here, by an idol worshipper (Rofe 1982: 109). There is one God in the world, but his place is in Israel.67 This idea is expressed in other narratives as well.68 It would seem that Na'aman praises the God of Israel with his words, and, in addition to that, he requests to take with him 'two mules' burden of earth' (v. 17) from the land of Israel, for ritual purposes. Between the opening words 'Behold, now I know' (v. 15) which are in contrast to the words of disillusionment 'Behold I thought' (v. 11) in the centre of the structure, Na'aman has learnt an instructive lesson (cf. Zakovitch 1985: 75). It is as if the words of Elisha to the king are heard by Na'aman. Elisha says: 'Let him come now to me' and immediately (the narrator having left out the stage of the emissaries):69 so Na'aman came with his horses and with his chariot, and stood at the door of the house of Elisha (v. 9). Na'aman's arrival is accompanied by crass behaviour and boastfulness.70 His appearance before the prophet is certainly not that of a sick man requiring salvation, but rather that of an army commander 'with his horses and his chariot'. He does not come humbly to the 67. Zakovitch 1985: 79. Cf. Josh. 22.19. 68. Josh. 24.31; 1 Kgs 18.36; 2 Kgs 1.3. 69. See on the question of the type of transmission of conversation without mention of the messenger: Vater 1980: 367, model 6. 70. In 'Arak. 16a, the Sages delineated seven reasons for infection by leprosy, one of which is haughtiness.

2. Decree and Implementation

67

prophet, but stands in the doorway and proclaims that his expectation was 'that he will surely come out to me' (v. 11), that the prophet would have come to him and not that he would have come out to the prophet. 'Horse71 and chariot' signify military might.72 He arrives therefore at the home of the man of God as if nothing exceeds his might, which is expressed by horses and a chariot (Zakovitch 1985: 53). Abarbanel states as follows: 'there was a vast army with him so that his honour would be exalted in the eyes of the prophet and he would try harder to heal him'. In the parallel hemistich in the structure we find And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and came and stood before him (15).

After Na'aman's physical and spiritual healing73 he returns and stands before Elisha. In contrast to 'and he came ' we find 'and he returned ', just as we find in parallel elements in another pivot pattern, 2 Kgs 15.19-20 ('and Pul came ... and the king of Assyria turned back').14 If at first he came to Elisha, he now stands before 'the man of God', convinced of the might of his God. In contrast to his horses and his chariots, symbolic of strength and pride (as mentioned), the narrator here states 'and all his company'. The second principle is expressed in the difference between the words 'and stood at the door of the house of Elisha', the meaning of which is 'waited for' (see 1 Kgs 20.38—'So the prophet departed and waited for the king') (cf. CoganTadmor 1988), and the words 'and he came and he stood ... before him', the meaning of which is a lesser individual standing before one who is greater than he and the display of readiness by the lesser to serve the greater,75 like a servant before his master (Abarbanel). While Elisha and Na'aman displayed arrogance the meeting between them was not possible. Now, Na'aman's expression of subjection to the man of God has made the meeting possible, a meeting in which Na'aman stands before Elisha. Whereas previously he stood in the opening of the doorway he now stands in front (of it) . The expectations of the little girl who said 'would that my Lord were before the prophet' (v. 3) 71. According to the corrected text in MT as well as in LXX 'with his horses', is in the plural, in order to heighten the impression created by the arrival of Na'aman. 72. Cf. Exod. 15.1; Isa. 31.1; Ezek. 26.7, etc. 73. Attention should be given to the parallel: 'and his flesh returned ... and he returned to the man of God ... and he said' (14, 15). 74. See Chapter 3, section 10, and also cf. 2 Kgs 18.17, 19.8. 75. Gen. 41.46, 1 Sam. 16.21. Cf. Zakovitch 1985: 74.

68

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

are now realized. Only after he comprehends that he is actually face to face 'with the man of God' does he really stand before him.76 Elisha, the proud prophet, who stands opposite the arrogant commander of the army, is not unduly impressed by the military forces arrayed around Na'aman, in fact he does not even bother to go out to him, just as he did not go out to his king, but sent a messenger (v. 8), perhaps because Na'aman came with horse and chariot, the symbols of pride (cf. Keil and Delitzsch 1965). Elisha wanted to prove to him that it was the decree of the prophet that would hold sway. However, he turns to the king and says, 'Let him come now to me', but not in order to go out to him, but to heal him from a distance, so that he will know 'that there is a prophet in Israel' (Malbim 1961). The prophet proves his ascendancy, therefore, by not going out to Na'aman (Cohn 1983: 177), and his self assurance here is overwhelming, particularly when compared to the pusillanimous response of the king of Israel (v. 7). It is through a messenger that he informs him and instructs him: Go and wash in the Jordan seven times and thy flesh shall be restored to thee and thou shalt be clean (v. 10). The prophet's instruction is straightforward and purposeful: he must bathe in the waters of the Jordan. The declaration in advance of the miracle serves to testify that this exceptional phenomenon is not coincidental, but is the result of preternatural intervention. The advice of the prophet to Na'aman to bathe himself is connected to the portion in the Pentateuch.77 Bathing is a stage in the process of purification from leprosy: 'And he shall wash his clothes ... and bathe himself in water and be clean ... And it shall be on the seventh day ... and he shall wash his clothes also he shall bathe his flesh in water and he shall be clean' (Lev. 14.8-9).78 The number 'seven times', which is both formulaic and sanctified, does not appear here because of any magical power,79 but because of 76. Cohn 1983: 178; Zakovitch 1985: 74. 77. Milgrom (1991) in his commentary on 14.5. 78. It is not unlikely that, despite the conventions of classical biblical study, the prophetic narratives actually recognize priestly viewpoints, expressed in the Priestly Document, in so far as this document reflects ancient points of view. A comparison between P and D, a comparison between ancient Eastern literature and the absence of terms in P in the later literature of the Second Temple, proves that P predates this and is from the time of the First Temple, written by priests in the Land of Israel. See Haran 1972: 183-90; and cf. Milgrom 1991: introduction 3-13. 79. There is a discussion in Babylonian texts on bathing seven times in the

2. Decree and Implementation

69

the part that it plays in the cleansing of leprosy: 'and he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times' (Lev. 14.5-7). The language used in the undertaking 'and thy flesh shall be restored to thee, and thou shalt be clean' is reminiscent of the language used to describe the incident concerning leprosy in Exod. 4.7. 'And he said. Put thy hand into thy bosom again. And he put his hand into his bosom and when he took it out behold it was turned again as his other flesh' (Zakovitch 1985: 57-58). It is interesting to note that Elisha does not mention the name of the Lord throughout the process of the miracle either. In the parallel hemistich in the structure, after his servants have convinced him by way of a minori ad majus that in fact the action demanded of him by the prophet is a minor act, and after they abbreviate the nine words spoken by the prophet (10) to only two words, 'wash and be clean ' (cf. Savran 1988: 107), then Na'aman's action is described in words that are very similar to that which is written in our verse: 'Then he went down, and dipped himself seven times in the Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh was restored like the flesh of a little child, and he was clean'(v. 14). It should be noted that these elements in both parts of the pattern are arranged in identical order and not in inverted order, because the dipping (the washing) in the Jordan precedes the returning of his flesh and its cleansing. This quintessential similarity between the decree and its implementation hints at the fact that Na'aman's immediate response to Elisha would have brought about rapid healing, and his protest against the authority of the prophet in vv. 11-13 was an utter waste of time. His non-compliance with the words of the prophet serves to delay his being cured (Zakovitch 1985: 58). Nevertheless, there are differences between the decree and its implementation. First we find here a verb pair which appears in parallel in the decree and the implementation (See Kravitz 1971: 12): 'Go and wash (v. 10) ... Then he went down80 and dipped himself ' (v. 14). I find this word pair in Exod. 19.10, 14 and in inverted order in 1 Kgs 18.44-45. In contradistinction to 'and wash', we have 'and he dipped himself. Possibly this change in language between washing and dipping teaches that Na'aman understood Euphrates for curing oneself of the effects of a scorpion sting (Kaufmann 1963a: 476; Rehm 1982). 80. In any event there is no necessity to correct 'and he went' as is done in the Peshitta.

70

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

that the essence of the washing was not simply in the interests of cleanliness, but was purification by dipping in obedience to the prophet. The verb 'dip' arouses an additional association with the ceremony of healing from leprosy 'and the priest dipped the finger of his right hand ... and sprinkled from the oil of his finger seven times before the Lord' (Lev. 14.16) (Zakovitch 1985: 70). If it is stated 'and Elisha sent unto him', in v. 10, then recognition is given here to the fact that Na'aman consciously agrees to the washing in accordance with the words of the prophet (and the intervention of his servants), and therefore it is stated that he dipped himself 'according to the saying of the man of God'. Na'aman fulfils his words. '[T]he man of God' and not 'according to the saying of Elisha' is mentioned here (cf. 2 Kgs 6.18), because in his instruction regarding the healing of Na'aman Elisha does not mention the name of the Lord—the narrator here is obliged to mention, before the announcement of the miracle, that it took place because of the desire of the one who sent him (Zakovitch 1985: 70-71). There is an additional pronounced difference between the decree and the implementation and that is in the result. Elisha promises: And thy flesh shall be restored to thee

and thou shall be clean (v. 10).

And his flesh was restored to him like the flesh of a little child

and he was clean (v. 14).

With this change the narrator teaches us that the implementation is more successful than the promise (just as Na'aman's words [v. 15] exceed Elisha's hope [v. 8]), and reminds us of the little girl (v. 2) who suggests to her mistress a way of healing her husband (v. 3) (Zakovitch 1985: 70-71). The words 'and he was clean ' conclude the purification 'scene' that is expressed in the words of the prophet (v. 10), in the words of Na'aman (v. 12), in the words of his servants (v. 13) and in the implementation (v. 14), in accordance with the words of the man of God. It is worth noting that the narrator does not highlight the part played by Elisha in the performance of the miracle, which is described in brief. Elisha is actually not directly involved in the incident and even the announcement of it is made only by the messenger (v. 10) (Zakovitch 1985: 72). These things interweave well with Na'aman's conclusion (v. 15). On hearing Elisha's instructions with regard to the process of healing, Na'aman 'was angry and went away' (v. 11). Na'aman's action teaches us that his anger was great ('and he was angry'),

2, Decree and Implementation

71

and the narrator places 'and he was angry' before 'and he went away', so that the reader should not err and think that he went away on the instruction of the prophet ('and he went') (Zakovitch 1985: 59). The author mentions his anger again in the parallel hemistich. After the mention of his words that constitute the reason for his ire, 'So he turned and went away in a rage' (v. 12), he commences with 'and he was angry ' and concludes with 'in a rage ', to teach us that his anger was great. And there is a chiastic integration of the words: and he was angry

and he went away

and he went away

in a rage.

' 'rage ' are synonyms which emphasize Na'aman's 'Anger anger, and appear in other places in Scripture in pairs: Jer. 32.37, Est. 1.12. At the centre of the pattern, at its peak, the words of the boastful army commander appear in the wake of Elisha's instruction and Elisha's non-appearance before him, both of which hurt him deeply. His words appear in two sentences, in the style 'Behold ... are not', the like of which we have found (in the words of one or two interlocutors) in Gen. 19.20, 27.36; Num. 24.11-12; 1 Kgs 18.11-13. In the first sentence he says, Behold, I thought, he will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the Lord his God, and wave his hand over the place, and so heal the infected person (v. 11). His arrogance and his pride are expressed in placing the words 'he will surely come out to me ' initially, in contrast to the words of Elisha when he says, 'Let him come now to me ' (v. 8). It is as if his honour has been demeaned. The means of healing do not appeal to him either, despite the fact that he came initially as a result of his belief in the ability of the prophet. He expects the prophet to call out in the name of the Lord his God, but Elisha sends him to wash in the river, a 'medicine' which disappoints him. And it is clear that there is irony here that Na'aman attempts to advise the prophet as to the best way to treat him. In what follows we again see the antithesis between the proud prophet and the boastful officer—'and he stood and he called'—but it is Na'aman, in fact, who stands before the prophet in order to thank him for being healed and to display his subordination before him (v. 15). And it is precisely Na'aman who benefits from the salvation of the Lord (v. 9), who expects the prophet to call in the name of the Lord his God, but the prophet refrains from showing his obeisance to God

72

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

(Zakovitch 1985: 61). He does not pray, as happens with Moses when he prays on behalf of his leprous sister (Num. 12.13). In the next sentence Na'aman expresses his nationalistic zeal (Rofe 1982: 110): Are not Amana and Parpar, rivers of Dammeseq, better than all the waters of Israel? May I not wash in them and be clean? (v. 12). Na'aman expresses his expectations of Elisha in v. 11 and in v. 12 he states the absurdity of the instruction of the prophet. He expresses his total dissociation from the prophet's words in the style of a parable: 'are not the ... better than'(Judg. 8.2, 1 Sam. 1. 8). That is: a little of the very best is preferable to a large quantity of poor quality.81 In the words of Na'aman, Amana and Parpar are better 'than all the waters of Israel together'. How much more so then are they better than the Jordan? Na'aman who boasts and demeans 'all the waters of Israel' recognizes at the conclusion of the section that 'there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel' (v. 15). The one who disparages the waters of Israel requests a small portion of its soil after his cure, so that he might worship its God. Na'aman commences the paradox with 'Are not ', and this is how he opens the conclusion: 'May I not wash in them and be clean' (Zakovitch 1985: 64-65). The conclusion brings him back to the prophet's instruction (v. 10, as mentioned): 'and wash ... and be clean'. The pivot pattern under discussion exalts both the recognition and the awareness of the Lord, who stands at the top of the ladder and from whom everything flows, as a central issue that is expressed through a dialogue between the prophet Elisha and Na'aman, the commander of the army of Aram. The pattern commences and concludes with the recognition and awareness: in the beginning recognition and awareness of the fact that there is a prophet in Israel, and at the conclusion the awareness and the recognition of the God of Israel. This opening and closing are actually more important than the line at the climax of the pattern. But if the proud prophet speaks about himself and does not mention the name of the Lord (he only mentions him in v. 16 which is outside the structure), then the Gentile commander of the army mentions his awareness of God after he has been cured of his illness. The boastfulness of the commander of the army, in contrast to the pride of the prophet, is expressed by his mighty host and his faith in its power, until the truth is revealed to him. The command to wash in the Jordan, which is finally 81. Zakovitch 1985: 64. Cf. Prov. 15.16-17, 16.8.

2. Decree and Implementation

73

fulfilled, causes Na'aman to demonstrate his arrogance not only by his actions but also by verbal expression. The words referred to are found at the climax of the pattern (just as the opening and conclusion which actually constitute the majority of the section comprise the dialogue of the characters). After Na'aman describes what he expects in the future, a description in which he mentions the name of the Lord, which the prophet of Israel does not do, he describes in the language of the parable the profound difference between the two worlds. Those who belong to them know their place and know in whom they put their trust: the world of the believers in God (even if Elisha only mentions him in his oath, v. 16), which is the only world is that of the prophet, as against the world of the believers in magic. These things (v. 12), symbolized by a comparison between the waters of Israel and the waters of Aram which embrace both religious outlooks, are diametrically opposed and come at the centre of the structure in contradistinction to the words of the man of God at the commencement of the structure and in contradistinction to Na'aman himself at its conclusion, after he acknowledges the greatness of the God of Israel.82 This acknowledgment of the Lord, which we find at the centre of the pivot pattern in which the Lord is central,83 comes at the end of the pattern here, as a conclusion drawn from the curing of Na'aman, because the miracle is always the fruit of the will and the intervention of the Lord, whether he is mentioned in connection with the miracle or not. These matters stand out in contrast to the arrogance of Na'aman at the climax of his utterances, in which he expresses a preference for the waters of Aram over those of Israel. It is of note that the gentile, Na'aman, exalts the name of the Lord God of Israel, just as Jethro did in his time (Exod. 18.11). Even more so there is an exponential recognition of the Lord stated in the pattern. The prophet does not mention the name of the Lord in the introduction. In the centre the Gentile Na'aman mentions his name, and at the conclusion he announces that he is now aware 'that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel', not in anticipation but from a recognition and an understanding of his powers of healing. In order to emphasize 82. We have seen additional links between the climax of the structure and its periphery as well ('the Lord [his] God', 'and he stood'). 83. 1 Sam. 3.17, 23.14-15; 1 Kgs 17.2-7; in Hezekiah's prayer 2 Kgs 19.15-19); in a pivot pattern (!), and at its extremities, as in the passage under discussion.

74

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

the supremacy of the Lord expressed by a Gentile at the conclusion of the pattern, we see, at the centre of the pivot pattern under discussion, at the climax (which is not, as already stated, the main aspect of the pattern), the doubt and the contempt expressed by Na'aman, in order to stress the radical turnabout in his consciousness and his recognition of God, at the conclusion of the pattern. 6. Gideon's Instructions to his Men (Judges 7.17) And the Lord said: A X A'

Whatever you see me do, do likewise: and behold, I am going to the edge of the camp, and it shall be whatever I do. so shall you do

This is an extremely brief pivot pattern, containing a total of 14 words: Gideon's instructions to his warriors before his attack on the Midianite Camp. In Judges 7, Gideon is recognized as a man of great self assurance, which is manifest in his consummate military prowess. His tactics in war are brave and decisive. He serves as an example to his soldiers, and this is expressed in his instructions, as they appear in the pivot pattern. This decisiveness is apparent in the brief words 'Whatever you see me do, do likewise'. This command is in the form of a slogan, which serves as a blueprint for action, and as a characteristic way of thought which includes within itself the essence of the action or the method of the speaker, and by which he is identified (Gelender 1983: 45). These words, which are a part of a more extensive command (vv. 15-18) contain an omission (Kaufmann 1962). The warriors are not told that they must surround the camp; their positions are not initially established; they are not informed about shattering the jugs or waving the torches. They are only told in general terms 'whatever you see me do'. Apparently, this flows from the speed of the action. Time is pressing. Gideon needs to take advantage of the element of surprise, after having heard the dream and its interpretation in the Midianite camp (vv. 13-14). In the first line we find that the action of the warriors must be the same as that of Gideon. And the reference here is obviously to: the blowing of the ram's horn, the displaying of the torches and the smashing of the jugs. And in contradistinction to this he says, 'whatever you see me do, do likewise'. According to vv. 19-20, it becomes clear that in fact enough was contained in this brief statement for the soldiers to

2. Decree and Implementation

75

understand what they had to do, and his instruction 'whatever I do so shall you do' is reiterated twice more for emphasis. He commanded them to pay attention to his every move, that if he should enter the Midianite camp they should enter it too, and therefore he says, 'and behold I am going to the edge of the camp'. If he stays outside the camp, and the Midianites kill one another, and he does not move, then they too should not move from their positions, lest a disaster befall them. At the climax of the pattern occurs the only specific remark (contrary to the general remarks in the first and last lines) in this pattern: 'and behold, I am going to the edge of the camp'. And so, his first action in the attack is: 'Gideon and the hundred men that were with him came to the edge of the camp' (v. 19), as he had told them to do. At the climax of the pattern, the soldiers are not mentioned, as they are in the first and third lines. Gideon alone is mentioned. His coming to the edge of the camp, as an example to his soldiers, constitutes a turning point in the action: the battle is joined against the Midianite camp and ends in victory. 7. Eli Urges Samuel to Reveal to Him the Words of God (1 Samuel 3.17) A

What is the word He has said to you? Please do not hide (it) from me! X May God do so to you, and continue so B' If you hide from me a single word A' of all the words that He said to you! B

This pivot pattern includes Eli's words to Samuel, when he urges him to reveal the word of God, which Samuel has heard previously (vv. 1114). These utterances form part of the dialogue between them (vv.1618, not the first dialogue in this episode). It is clear, therefore, that what we see here, Eli's urging of Samuel, is of utmost importance to the narrator, who therefore presents it as a pivot pattern. Eli's words are spoken at length. He knows that the words of God are directed against him and his house,84 and they are harsh. He is apprehensive, and what he says is therefore replete with repetition, almost as 84. In so far as has already been announced in the past in a harsh line (2.27-36). Cf. Eslinger 1985: 154.

76

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

if he is attempting to delay Samuel's reply.85 This recoiling from reality is possibly why he does not mention the name of the Lord as the subject of the sentence, despite the fact that the structure would seem to indicate this to be necessary: 'What is the word He [the Lord] has said to you?' This is emphasized in the words which he instructs Samuel to say before the Lord appears to him, 'and it shall be, if he calls thee, that thou shalt say, "Speak Lord for Thy servant heareth" ' (v. 9), and in what he says after Samuel relates everything to him, 'And he said "It is the Lord: let Him do what seems good in His eyes" ' (v. 18).86 Eli deletes the name of God, according to the dictate of his heart, because it is he and his house that are being referred to, just as Samuel omits the name of the Lord in his reply to the Lord, which was contrary to what Eli had directed him to do (vv. 9, 10). Samuel keeps the word of the Lord to himself without responding (v. 15). Even Eli, when he dares to demand from Samuel to reveal everything, cannot bring himself to utter the name of the Lord his God. This reticence parallels Samuel's reluctance. Eli's prolix statement testifies to the powerful conflict within him, to his doubts and to his fears (Simon 1981: 123). These doubts are expressed in the long open ended formula: 'Then Eli called ... and he said' (vv. 16-17), which constitutes a diminution of tempo, demonstrating how difficult it is for Eli to ask of Samuel to do what he asks. Eli commences his words with a question: 'What is the word He has said to you??*1 Eli refers, without realizing it, to the opening of the Lord's prophecy to Samuel: 'Behold I will do a thing in Israel' (v. 11). There is an additional parallel in the words of Eli, when he refers to the word of the Lord: 'which He has said to you' in contrast to 'which I have spoken concerning his house' (v. 12). 85. Cf. Klaus 1984: 320. Unpolished, repetitive speech expressing the embarrassment or excitement of the interlocutor occurs in Gen. 21.26; 1 Sam. 4.16, 9.1213, 20.28-29; Jon. 1.8; Ruth 2.8-9, as well. And see Fokkelman 1993: 183. 86. Possibly an additional reason for the omission of the name of the Lord is that fate mocks Eli who seeks the word of the Lord from his servant. There is no doubt that this was extremely difficult for him, and the name of the Lord is deleted to minimize the pain and the anguish. Cf. Caird 1953. 87. A similar question occurs in the Bible, asked by Zedekiah of Jeremiah: 'Is there any word from the Lord?' (37.17). A variation of this phrase appears in the 4QSama: Tell me of the vision of God.' The suggestion that the text of v. 15—'and Samuel feared to show Eli the vision'—was repeated is unacceptable. This, however, is not found in the ancient translations.

2. Decree and Implementation

77

At the conclusion of what he says—parallel to the commencement of his words, in accordance with the pivot structure—he repeats the same expression 'the word that he has said to you'. But in place of the opening word—the interrogative 'what'—he substitutes 'of all',88 hinting to Samuel to tell him everything. Eli understands that the young Samuel, who has become acquainted with the word of the Lord for the first time, has heard harsh things, and will possibly hesitate and be fearful to repeat them precisely before Eli, his mentor. Eli consequently emphasizes the word 'all' and therefore Samuel 'told him everything, and hid nothing from him' (v. 18).89 In this structure, in which Eli urges Samuel to do his bidding, five verbs and nouns derived from the radical occur in one long sentence. The reason for this iteration and the additional repetition of the phrase 'hide it from me' is clear, and examples of it are found in other parts of the Bible (Gen. 21.26; 1 Sam. 4.16; 2 Sam. 18.29; etc.). Please do not hide it from me—Meaning 'do not conceal', 'do not withhold', this radical appears frequently in the Bible, usually with either the word or the word both indicative of the negative, when the speaker needs to hear important things (e.g. Josh. 7.19; 2 Sam. 14.18; Jer. 38.25), and similar to that which is said by Zedekiah to Jeremiah: 'I will ask thee something: hide nothing from me' (Jer. 38.14). Only Eli actually adjures his listener, Samuel.90 In parallel with the expression above, we find a similar expression 'hide from me'. But in place of the words of request 'please do not' the conditional 'if appears, which is part of the adjuration. In the centre of the pivot pattern we find an oath: 'May God do so to you, and continue so'.91 This expression of adjuration is an idiom used 88. A parallel between 0 and all, occurs inter alia, in: Num. 23.6, 'he and all the princes of Moab'; 23.17, 'and the princes of Moab with him'. During the mourning on the death of Aaron, it is said, 'and when all the congregation saw ... and they mourned for Aaron' (Num. 20.29). And in the mourning for Moses it is said (Deut. 34.8): 'And the children of Israel wept for Moses'. 89. 'Things' in contrast to 'thing' as spoken by Eli. 90. In 2 Sam. 14 there is an interchange of the creative characters: the wise woman of Tekoah is placed under oath, after the King has spoken to her, 'Hide not from me the thing' (18). 91. The expression 'And even more so ' does not appear in LXX or the Vulgate, and these words are deleted because in all these textual versions in the Bible these words 'and more so appear.

78

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

in oaths, and the word 'so' is indefinite. Its meaning is 'God will do such and such an evil to you', without detailing what that evil will be. The formula of the oath is usually stated from a position of strength and authority. Like Saul to Jonathan, David to Amasa, Solomon to Bathsheba and in the instance here, Eli to Samuel, who despite the fact that he is the one privileged to hear the word of the Lord, and the priest must speak to him, is nevertheless younger than Eli and still serves him.92 Eli realises intuitively that the youth is evading the issue and that there are things which are being hidden, as it is stated 'And Samuel feared to show Eli the vision' (v. 15), because of not wanting to cause Eli any anguish, the words of reproach being very harsh. Therefore Eli does not ask him, but demands of him, on oath, to reveal the whole truth, the coercion to prophesy coming from Eli himself (Simon 1981: 124), and therefore 'He did not hide anything from him' (18) (Simon 1981: 124; Amit 1987b: 33). The contribution of the pivot pattern to the understanding of Eli's words is expressed as follows: the curse is emphasized by the adjuration93 and at its centre the name of God appears.94 Its function is to force Samuel to speak, to reveal the word of the Lord to Eli. This is how the roles are turned about: the erstwhile servant suddenly becomes a prophet, whom the priest commands on oath to reveal to him the word of the Lord without detracting from any of it. This demand for the unvarnished word of God, constitutes the major factor in Eli's desire, and the words are located on the periphery of the pattern and not at its centre. The oath in God's name is situated at the centre of the structure to indicate that Samuel has no alternative but to speak the word of the Lord and thereby to prophesy.

92. The only exception appears in the book of Ruth. See Brenner 1988: 106107. 93. Cf. Watson (1984), who is of the opinion that the structure serves to stress the curse. Radak's opinion concerning the oath, that it is a linguistic convention to say this in an oath, is not acceptable. 94. God is mentioned here as part of the oath. The divine name is not uttered by him. Note should be taken that there is a parallelism here with the oath of the Lord in v. 14: 'And therefore I have sworn to the house of Eli.' The one is an oath indicating what has been realized and the other is an oath made in order to reveal the fact.

2. Decree and Implementation

79

8. God's Words to Samuel Concerning the Coronation of a King (1 Samuel 8.7 -9) A

Hearken to the voice of the people in all that they say to thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them. (v. 7) B According to all the deeds which they have done since the day that I brought them out of Egypt, and to this day. (v. 8) X in that they have forsaken me, and served other gods. B' so they also do to thee. A' Now you must hearken to their voice: Nevertheless you should solemnly forewarn them, and relate to them the customary practice of the king that shall reign over them.

God's response to Samuel, to listen to the voice of the people, is situated between Samuel's prayer to the Lord, after he has heard the people's demand for a king (vv. 5-6) and the 'customary practice of the king', about which Samuel tells the people in accordance with the decree of the Lord (vv. 11-18). This response constitutes a pivot pattern. And the Lord said to Samuel, Hearken to the voice of the people in all that95they say to thee (v. 7). The Lord's opening words to Samuel are repeated at the conclusion. The Lord says to Samuel 'Hearken unto the people ... that I should not reign over them' (v. 7). After a brief word of explanation and despite his anguish, he returns to his principal line of thought and repeats, 'and now hearken to their voice96 ... that will reign over them' (v. 9). Again, after the people's refusal to listen to the voice of Samuel (v. 19), the instruction of the Lord is repeated with greater decisiveness, 'Listen to their voice and make them a king' (v. 22). The narrator stresses that contrary to the word of the Lord and of Samuel 'to listen to the voice' of the people it is the people that actually refuse to listen to Samuel's voice. This instruction (that is used in the ensuing chapters of the study — chs. 15, 28.20-22, etc.) serves to indicate to Samuel that he should conduct the coronation, even though the issue is evil in the eyes of the Lord as well as in his own. Samuel is 95. McCarter (1980) reads when in place of that as in LXX. There is no need for this. Compare 12.1: 'In all that you said'. 96. After he has commenced with the voice of the people he abbreviates the repetition and states their voice, in that the attributive in the sentence is already known.

80

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

hurt by the desire of the people to dismiss him from his role as judge. As a result of this he prays to the Lord (v. 6).97 In all that they say to thee is parallel to what is spoken in the previous verse and in other verses (vv. 9, 12.1). Even though there is no precise similarity, the parallels are extremely clear: Samuel listens to the voice of the Lord (i.e. the people) and appoints a king over them. For they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them (v. 7). The Lord blames them for having cancelled the covenant of kingship (Buber 1964: 169), by choosing a king of flesh and blood, and this involves a rejection of the other king, who is their king, and not the rejection of a mere judge. In conformity with this style, 'for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me', there is a degree of emphasis (cf. Driver 1960). The difference in the pronouns is stressed, thee, me, beginning with the object and not the subject. The words of the Lord display a more profound understanding of the character of the people and the character of man in his refusal to accept the demands of the people. The narrator beautifully exploits the divine omniscience which enables him to reveal the truth behind the request of the people (pressure from the Philistines and from the Ammonites). In his response the Lord emphasizes the difference between Samuel's lack of understanding, concealed behind the request by linguistic emphasis 'for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me'. The Lord therefore corrects the misapprehension of Samuel concerning the demand of the people. The verb 'rejects describes the divine perspective, and does not necessarily characterize the perspective of the author (Eslinger 1985: 262-63). In the parallel element, at the conclusion of the pivot pattern, we find a similar opening, 'and now hearken to their voice', but with the addition: 'nevertheless you should solemnly forewarn them, and relate to them the customary practice of the king that shall reign over them'. The word 'and now serves to emphasize the turning point in the issue, the conclusion which flows from the previous utterances spoken.98 For between the two statements 'hearken to (their) (the people's) 97. Buber (1964: 168) maintains that prays in biblical language, without exception, means to stand in the divine presence in the midst of an incident which is taking place at the time in order to carry out the will of God as it is revealed. 98. Compare this expression to other sections of the text: Gen. 27.8, 43; 1 Sam. 15.1. 28.22, etc. And there are those who opine that 'and now hearken to their

2. Decree and Implementation

81

voice' the Lord says that the nation has breached the covenant with him, and therefore it is astonishing to hear God say yet again 'Listen to their voice'. It is apparent that this results from Samuel's lack of desire to do so, so that God repeats himself and commands him to listen to their voice (Uffenheimer 1973: 151). This concession is devoid of delight, and the Lord instructs Samuel to point out the true meaning of 'the customary practice of the king' to the people. 'Nevertheless' serves as a limitation, and its purpose is, as Rashi states, 'that the fear of the kingship should be upon them'. The response of the Lord is positive and negative at one and the same time." Both the verbs are in the hiphil ^100 —causative action. And the first verb is doubled by the use of the absolute infinitive for emphasis: to forewarn them in such a way that they will know of the evil which the kingship will bring upon them. This is what Rabbi Yehuda says: 'the only reason for relating this episode is to threaten them' (Sank. 20b). Therefore 101 means the custom and the law which the king will determine on his own like '(1 Sam. 2.13), as was the custom with despotic kings (Segal 1964). According to all the deeds which they have done since the day that I brought them out of Egypt and to this day (v. 8). In LXX we find 'they did (to me)', that is to say, all that they have done to me ... they will also do to you. Many of the moderns are also of this opinion (cf. McCarter 1980). But this contradicts what is written in the previous verse that the people's action was not aimed at Samuel, but at the Lord. Therefore the MT is preferable, and there are those who interpret it in the following way: as they have done in the past, so they will do in your time (Segal 1974). Apparently the LXX compared 'they did (to me)' with the end of the verse, 'so they also do to thee'. The Lord emphasizes in his utterance 'according to all the deeds', as stated previously 'hearken to the voice of the people in all that they say to thee' voice' (v. 9) is in contrast to 'now make us a king' in the words of the nation (v. 5). 99. Buber 1964: 236-37. He maintains that the author of this narrative who predicts the defects of kingship that has become autocratic asks himself the penetrating and difficult question regarding the aims and objectives of the king, and answers the question in a purely epic way, yes and no together. 100. This expression appears in Gen. 43.3, and Jer. 11.7 as well. 101. Buber (1961: 62) is of the opinion that the ways of the king in v. 9 does not refer to that which comes after it, vv. 11-18, but to the constitution which is read to the congregation (1 Sam. 10.25).

82

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

(v. 7). And it is his intention to say that they have betrayed God and have forsaken him forever, and they have forgotten that the Lord brought them up out of the land of Egypt (cf. 2 Kgs 21.15). There is an exaggeration regarding time, in order to minimize the severity of the present action (Chamiel 1967: 75). And in the parallel hemistich in the pattern, he mentions 'so they shall also do to thee'. The use of the words 'according to all... so also ' indicate continuity, a shared experience,102 and emphasize the similarity between the actions.103 In these utterances of the Lord, regarding their actions (and not their words) in the past and in the present, a parallel is formed between the demand for human rule and idolatry, which attracted the people from the time of the exodus from Egypt and until the present moment. In both instances the children of Israel have rejected divine rule. A number of researchers104 have suggested that there is an example here of haplography, and in actual fact one would have to read according to this opinion: 'and so they will make a king as well' (haplography of the letter . It would seem that mis reading is acceptable, and this would strengthen the analogy between idolatry and the sins connected with worshipping the king. The words 'hearken to the voice' 'reject', as they are used in this section, constitute key words in the variation of instructions as well as in the following chapters as has been indicated (Garsiel 1981:333). This opinion is reinforced by what is written in 1 Sam. 10.18-19, 12.6-12. With the reference to the sins of the children of Israel, the issue of the coronation of the king is again mentioned in a similar context. At the climax of the pivot pattern, we find the example of the evil deeds which they performed: 'They have forsaken me, and serve other gods.'105

102. Cf. Gesenius 1960: par. 118 S-W, par. 161c. 103. Cf. 2 Sam. 7.17. Harris 1981: 80. 104. Cf., e.g., Harris 1981: 79. He compares the expression 'make a king' to 'that made Moses and Aaron' (1 Sam. 12.6) as well as to 'and made priests from all ranks of the people' (1 Kgs 12.31). 105. Buber (1964: 169) is of the opinion that v. 8 constitutes a rhetorical bridge which has been added and which spoils the line.

2. Decree and Implementation

83

And the worst of the deeds is referred to, and that is idolatry,106 that contains both rebellion and ingratitude together. Idolatry is an example of the rejection of the Lord and his statutes. These sins placed at the climax of the pattern (see Exod. 20.2-3) indicate the severity of the sin—the two primary issues, the bases of the religion of Israel in the covenant between the Lord and his people, are brought as examples stated by the Lord to indicate that both religion and covenant have been breached, took place at the time when they requested a king to judge them. This sin is compared here, as we have seen, to the sin of demanding a king. In any case we understand its gravity. 9. David's Oath that Solomon Shall Succeed Him as King (1 Kings 1.24-35)™1 The following pivot pattern represents an act in a complex plot: after the attempt at appointing Adonijah as king of Israel, there was a marked increase in the intrigues, schemes and unrest with regard to the succession in the court of the ageing David. The prophet Nathan swiftly initiates a twofold approach to the king: first Bathsheba and then himself. Both the prophet's utterances to the king, and the king's response to them in his meeting with Bathsheba (vv. 29-30) and after that with Zadok the priest, with Nathan the prophet and with Benaiah son of Jehoiada (vv. 32-35) are included in this pivot pattern. The boundaries of the pattern are clear: it opens with Nathan's words (v. 24) and closes with David's reaction which fulfils the requirements of the petitioners. Benaiah's reaction (vv. 36-37), which at first sight concludes the episode (and which commences with a description of the implementation of the king's instruction in v. 38), is not included in the pivot pattern, possibly in order to conclude with the principle that, according to the words of the king, Solomon will sit on David's throne. This promise in the form of an oath which Nathan sought to achieve 106. These expressions occur very frequently in the book of Deuteronomy as well as in other texts, and they are considered as part of the characteristic vocabulary of the book, of which the verse under discussion is rich in examples: 'Since I brought them up from the land of Egypt' (2 Kgs 21.15); 'Forsake the Lord' (Josh. 24.11, 20; Judg. 2.12, 13; 1 Sam. 12.10, etc.); 'Serve other Gods' (Josh. 24.16; Judg. 17; 1 Kgs 9.6, etc.). Cf. McCarter (1980) and Eslinger (1985). 107. Cf. Fokkelman 1981: 367.

84

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

(vv. 12-13) is the major factor in the picture before us, and it is not by coincidence that it occurs in the centre, at the climax of the pattern (vv. 29-30). A And Nathan said, My Lord, Oh king hast thou said (v. 24) B Adonijah shall reign after me and he shall sit upon my throne C For he is gone down this day, and has slaughtered oxen and fat cattle and sheep in abundance, and has called all the king's sons (v. 25) and the captains of the host, and Evyatar the priest, and behold they eat and drink before him, D and say, Long Live the King Adonijah E But me, even me thy servant, and Zadok the priest, and Benaiah (v. 26) the son of Yehovada, and thy servant Solomon, has he not called. F Is this thing done by my lord the king, and thou hast not informed thy servant, who should sit on the throne of my lord (v. 27) the king after him? G Then king David answered and said, Call me Bathsheba. (v. 28) H And she came into the king's presence, and stood before the king. I And the king swore and said, As the Lord lives, (v. 29) who has redeemed my soul out of all distress, even as (v. 30) / swore to thee by the Lord God of Israel saying X Indeed, Solomon thv son shall reign after me. and he shall sit upon my throne in my stead I' Even so will I certainly do this day H1 Then Bathsheba bowed with her face to the earth and (v. 31) prostrated herself to the king and said, Let my lord King David live forever G' And King David said, Call me Zadok the priest and Nathan the prophet and Benaiah son of Yehoyada (v. 32) and they came before the king F' And the king said to them, Take with you the servants (v. 33) of your lord, and cause Solomon my son to ride upon my own mule and bring him down to Gihon E' and let Zadok the priest and Nathan the prophet anoint him (v. 34) here and blow with the shofar D' and say long live King Solomon C' Then you shall come up after him (v. 35) B1 That he may come and sit upon my throne, for he shall be king in my stead A1 And I have appointed him to be ruler over Israel and over Judah

I find Nathan's speech in the first half of the structure and, in the second half, David's reply to his three loyal supporters. David's brief conversation with Bathsheba is situated in the centre of the pattern, and its actual climax is the oath that Solomon will sit on David's throne. The commencement of the pattern contains the words spoken by Nathan, who approaches the king with the utmost respect (My Lord Oh

2. Decree and Implementation

85

king).108 It opens in the shape of a direct quotation from the king's own words: 'hast thou said', and pursuant to the words spoken previously by Bathsheba ('thou hast sworn'—v. 17), on the basis of which Nathan implies that the king did in fact say these things. But, contrary to Bathsheba's choice of the words 'thou hast sworn', Nathan says, 'hast thou said', as he cannot appear to be somebody who is aware of an intimacy (oath-promise) between the king and his wife, given behind closed doors, and to which he was not a party. In the final hemistich, which is parallel to the first, we encounter the final aspects of David's oath and instructions given. In contrast to Nathan's ironic question, 'hast thou said', which comes before the quotation of the undertaking, David stresses here that he does not really confirm his undertaking, but he commands that it be fulfilled. The verb pair, 'says-commands' located here in parallel elements, is also encountered in the book of Psalms 33.9, 'for He spoke and it was. He commanded and it stood fast'109, where the second verb is stronger and more forceful than the first.110 This applies in this case too. 'Says' , as used by Nathan, expresses readiness, and the king changes it to 'I commanded' which denotes decisiveness, and obviously the king's command will be executed with due speed, and this in fact happens actually immediately after the instruction is given (vv. 38-40). David concludes with an undertaking, 'I have appointed him to be ruler over Israel and over Judah'. In the second hemistich Nathan quotes, as it were, the king's promise, 'Adonijah shall reign after me, and he shall sit upon my throne', and it would seem that this statement is fictitious. Or possibly it uses the language of surprise111 (as in 1 Kgs 21.7; 2 Kgs 5.26) 'as if to say, that have you said that Adonijah will reign after me? In fact you did not say that and the consequence of

108. In contrast to his words to David in the episode concerning Bathsheba (v. 12). The style is appropriate to the incident and to the subject matter of what is said. Cf. Bar-Efrat 1980: 92. 109. This is so too regarding the change of God's decree (Gen. 2.16) to a statement by the woman in the narrative with the serpent (Gen. 3.3). 110. 'Neither this nor that' in accordance with Malbim's method. Cf. Kugel 1981b: 289. 111. Cf. Abarbanel (1520) and Malbim (1961) in their commentaries and Burney 1970b. This is possibly the conclusion drawn by Savran (1988: 124).

86

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

this is, how dare Adonijah do what he has done without your instruction'? (Abarbanel) By use of this fictitious decision, which is passed on to David, he attempts to make David dissociate himself from Adonijah's exploit (Frisch 1986: 52), and this is why he changes Bathsheba's words in v. 17, which are gently stated, for the question in v. 24.112 The doubt occasioned by the inquiry is couched in careful terms, but there is sufficient in the language to cause David to admit that this command did not emanate from him, an admission that is not expressed explicitly in so many words but rather in David's practical decision in response to the question who will inherit his throne (Bar-Efrat 1979: 30). In the parallel hemistich (B') we find David's pronouncement to Nathan's surprise, in chiastic parallel: Adonijah shall reign after me

and he shall sit upon my throne (v. 24)113

that he may come and sit upon my throne

for he shall be king in my stead (v. 35)

The chiastic relationship is the most significant indicator of the connection between the words (cf. Weiss 1962: 251). Nathan speaks of Adonijah's fictitious coronation with the intention of rousing David (as has been mentioned), but David speaks of Solomon's actual appointment as king, which will certainly come about with due alacrity. And Solomon's actual sitting on the throne prior to the coronation (v. 35)— and not a mere announcement of the anointing—has within it the practical fulfilment of the undertaking (Bar-Efrat 1979: 21). Even more so: while David speaks of Adonijah (according to Nathan that is) as 'reigning after me' (after his death), and this he does when he promises Bathsheba as well (v. 30) here, he states clearly that Solomon will reign in his stead after he has sat on his throne (and therefore the order is inverted). That is to say: that he will reign in David's lifetime. And he 112. The narrator quotes Nathan's words in detail, because their similarity, from David's point of view, serves to reinforce what she has said. However the changes in nuance and detail succeed in convincing him that he is confronting original and independent reportage. Cf. Frisch 1986: 151. 113. An expression which recurs frequently both in this passage and in the narrative as a whole, as well as in the customs or the ways of the king (Deut. 17.18) and in 1 Kgs 16.11 etc.

2. Decree and Implementation

87

therefore appoints him king immediately after speaking these words, in order to prevent any attempt at usurping the throne by Adonijah who lays claim to the crown. The trend towards similarities between the versions (in the description of the parallel coronations), which announce the royal ascendancy of Adonijah and of Solomon, constitutes the creation of an antithetical parallelism between the illegitimate coronation of Adonijah and the legitimate ascendancy of Solomon to the throne (Zalevski 1981: 85). The parallel pronouncements, shaped in similar language, demonstrate David's determination regarding his heir, and this is expressed in the inversion. The degree of the liability differs from one statement to another: David's choice of Adonijah is hypothetical and Nathan mentions it to David in the form of a rhetorical question in order to elicit a contrary response, while David's appointment of Solomon, heard from David's own mouth, bears considerable validity in that it is the quotation of an oath made in the name of the Lord. In the third line of the structure (C)—for he is gone down this day and has slaughtered oxen and fat cattle and sheep in abundance, and has called all the king's sons and the captains of the hosts (v. 25)— Nathan is intentionally expansive in his description of the festivities and merrymaking (cf. v. 9). He adds 'and sheep in abundance' (like Bathsheba [19]) and 'and behold they eat and drink'114 in order to galvanize the king into action. The contradistinction between this hemistich and its parallel (C1)—'then you shall come up after him'—is expressed in the antithesis between 'come up' and 'gone down' , which occurs frequently in Scripture.115 That 'is gone down this day, and has slaughtered' is said about Adonijah, whereas 'then you shall come up after him' is said about Solomon by David—and hints at his ascendancy to the throne. There is no doubt that there is a practical as well as a symbolic significance to the word pair Note that the Hebrew verb is in the singular: Adonijah is virtually alone. He has few supporters, whereas the word applied to Solomon —in the plural, an allusion to his many followers that came after him116 (cf. 114. According to Abarbanel: when his father was close to death, Adonijah made merry. Even Bathsheba does not use this expression (v. 19). 115. Cf., e.g., Isa. 14.13-15: 'I will ascend into heaven, I will ascend above the heights of the clouds. Yet thou shall be brought down to She'ol.' 116. Cf. 'and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee' (Gen. 12.3).

88

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

'and the whole nation came up after him' [v. 40] and 'and they are come up from there rejoicing' [v. 45] as opposed to what is said about Adonijah—'and they brought him down from the altar' [v. 53]) (cf. Fokkelman 1987: 369). Adonijah descends, Solomon ascends. And this is expressed by parallel hemistichoi in the pattern—and constitutes a symbolic allusion to what is expected in the remainder of the picture. In the fourth line (D) we encounter the pronouncements of the celebraters (according to Nathan, so to speak), 'and say, Long live King Adonijah', a slogan which is frequently found in Scripture, particularly at the beginning of a king's reign and at the time of his anointing (as with Saul-1 Sam. 10.24; Absalom-2 Sam. 16.16; Solomon in this chapter [v. 39]; Joash-2 Kgs 11.12).1171 do not encounter this cry either in the description by the narrator (v. 9) or in the words of Bathsheba to David (v. 19). It is clear that Nathan said this to arouse the ire of the king, who was still governing, and to spur him into action on behalf of Solomon (cf. Alter 1988: 118). In contrast to this rallying cry we find, in the parallel hemistich (D1), David's instructions to his loyal followers: 'And say Long live King Solomon'. After his anointing by Zadok the priest and the blast on the ram's horn (v. 34), this cry completes Solomon's appointment as king and constitutes encouragement to the king. David's instruction has now been implemented in full, and Solomon gains confirmation of his royal status accompanied by the same formula (v. 39). The parallelism in the coronations, and the similarities in the accounts of both the appointments of Adonijah and Solomon, the one false and the other genuine, stands out. In the fifth hemistich (E) we find the discontent, so to speak, of Nathan the prophet, who contends as one hurt before the king: But me, even me thy servant and Zadok the priest and Benaiah the son ofJehoiada, and thy servant Solomon11* he did not call (v. 26). Nathan mentions himself first in the list because he has experienced it himself and in order to mislead the king regarding the extent of the insult which he feels, as a result of not being called by Adonijah. In order too, to emphasize this, he uses both prepositions and pronouns: 'But me, even 117. It is interesting that this cry does not occur with the anointing of David as king. 118. 'And your son' is written in LXX. There are those who consider that this change is as a result of what is written in v. 19 (Burney, 1970b). But it would seem that Nathan (like Bathsheba) emphasizes that Solomon is loyal to David and is therefore his servant!

2. Decree and Implementation

89

me thy servant'.119 And last on the list he mentions 'thy servant Solomon'. I have here a list that stresses the loyalty to David of those who were not invited to the coronation of Adonijah. In the parallel hemistich of the pattern (E1) the king mentions those who made Solomon king, outstanding in their service to him and not understandably amongst those invited by Adonijah: Zadok the priest120 will anoint him, and Nathan the prophet will be with them. Benaiah the son of Jehoiada is not mentioned here because he plays no defined role in the anointing. But according to the narrator he is present at the occasion, in that the king speaks to him as well (v. 32) and he responds to the king and blesses him (vv. 36-37), and he is also mentioned regarding the coronation (v. 38). It is clear therefore why the order of the characters changes between E and E1: Zadok anoints Solomon here and therefore he is mentioned first, while Nathan, when he speaks to David, mentions himself first. In the sixth hemistich (F) Nathan asks a question which apparently does not express doubt (cf. Keil and Delitzsch 1965) but serves perhaps to soften the harshness of the complaint: 7s this thing done by my lord the king and thou hast not informed thy servant, who should sit on the throne of my lord the king after himT (v. 27). He wishes to indicate: if in fact everything done by Adonijah was in accordance with your instructions and decree, then I am amazed that you did not tell me who would sit on the throne (Abarbanel). Nathan concludes as he commenced: 'and he shall sit upon my throne (v. 24) ... who should sit on the throne of my lord the king after him?' (v. 27). This is the central problem in this chapter and in the picture before us, and it finds expression therefore in the climax of the pattern (v. 30). Both Bathsheba (v. 18) and Nathan stress that they cannot in any way imagine that Adonijah would dare to elevate himself to the kingship during his father's lifetime, without his acquiescence. It should be noted that Nathan expresses no claim in favour of Solomon. His opinions on the appointment of the son as king are couched as a question, which is nothing more than surprise at not being invited to the ceremony of Adonijah's coronation (Frisch 1986: 153). In the parallel hemistich (F1) David responds to Nathan stating that 119. See: 'I Pray thee—F (1 Sam. 25.24); 'I come not against thee' (2 Chron. 35.21). See Gesenius 1960: 438, par. 135. 120. The text in v. 8 also indicates that he is appointed as first amongst the great ones of Israel who refused to support Adonijah.

90

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Solomon is the man who will sit on his throne, and for this purpose he will be placed upon the king's own mule, which was specifically for his use ('that is mine'), as in 2 Sam. 13.29; 18.9—referring to Amnon and to Absalom. The verbs in both hemistichoi, describing inaction (in the case of Nathan) and action (in the case of David himself), are both in 121 the causative conjugation: Solomon's being mounted on the mule with the procession of the distinguished members of the people of Israel at his side, is a public display of proof that Solomon is the leader of Israel, and he is obliged to undertake all the responsibilities of leadership (Num. 27.17; 2 Sam. 5.1-2). This is the announcement ('and you did not inform') which Nathan has anticipated and hoped for! David's words, as we have seen in the hemistichoi of the pattern, are parallel to the words of Nathan, and employ the same diction. I deduce from this that Nathan's statements to David, following those of Bathsheba, are thoroughly absorbed into David's consciousness, and the instructions for implementing the decrees are made accordingly (vv. 3839) (cf. Zalevski 1981:85). David issues two calls, one after Nathan has spoken, 'Call me Bathsheba',122 in order to convey to her his oath to appoint her son as king (F), and one after her blessing, 'Call me Zadok ... Nathan ... and Benaiah' (G1) in order to testify to them on the actualization of this promise—the appointment of Solomon as king. And what follows is also an example of parallelism: 'and she came before the king (v. 28) and they came before the king' (v. 32)123 In the eighth hemistich (H) the appearance of Bathsheba before the king is given particular emphasis: 'and she came into the king's presence, and she stood before the king'.124 The king is mentioned twice in 121. Cf. Fokkelman 1981 368. In contrast to 'for he is gone', in the singular, referring to Adonijah, as is stated (v. 25). 122. After Nathan's entrance (v. 23), Bathsheba leaves the king's chamber, and now he calls her again. Cf. Absalom's call (2 Sam. 17.5). Cf. Abarbanel. Attention should be given to the fact that David now becomes the initiator and he summons his people, who previously had approached him. The issue stands out in contrast to his weakness at the beginning of the plot: here he presents himself as a decisive and assertive king, who makes fateful decisions and concerns himself with the details of their implementation (Frisch 1986: 155). 123. But are not parallel in the pivot pattern. 124. LXX and the Vulgate read: 'and she came before the king and stood before him'. The Peshitta translates: 'and she came before him and stood before the king'.

2. Decree and Implementation

91

order to give prominence to his kingship and to the power of his decision regarding the question as to who will reign after him (all the characters who appear in the chapter—Adonijah, Nathan, Bathsheba accept his decision regarding the question of his successor without question). Bathsheba's appearance before the king is like, for example, David's standing before Saul (1 Sam. 16.21), and it is said, about one who stands before someone greater than he and listens to his commands in order to carry them out, like it is said about Abishag (1 Kgs 1.2). I understand this to mean that Bathsheba stood before the king in order to obey him and to accept responsibility for carrying out everything that he would say to her regarding Solomon her son (cf. Ehrlich 1900). In the parallel hemistich (H1), Then Bathsheba bowed125 with her face to the earth and prostrated herself to the king and said, "Let my Lord King David live for ever" (v. 31), after she hears the oath for which she has been waiting. The word king is stressed twice in this hemistich as well: once as stated by the narrator 'and she prostrated herself to the king\ and once as spoken by Bathsheba when she blesses him 'Let my lord King David live forever'. This formal benison is surprising, in that it was conventionally used at the king's anointing, whereas here it is used in his old age, just prior to his death, implying: 'May your days be lengthened and may the day that Solomon my son will rule in your stead' not come speedily. Thus her words may not be construed as meaning 'heaven forefend', that she seeks his death soon, so that her son can reign in his place (cf. Bar-Efrat 1979: 91). Attention should be given to the fact that we encounter a blessing on David, 'Long live the king', at the centre of the pattern, after its climax. At the commencement of the pattern (D) we find this blessing bestowed on Adonijah, and the genuine blessing at the termination of the pattern (D1), this time given to Solomon. Only one of the three blessings is realized, the one received by Solomon (v. 39), in that neither David nor Adonijah had their days lengthened after the blessing, one because of old age and the other at the hand of man. At the centre of the pattern we find the king's vow:

LXX, LV—'and she came and stood before the king'. The version of the Peshitta which inverts the order and all the other versions point to attempts to overcome the tautology of the MT (Burney 1970b). Ehrlich (1900) maintains, justifiably in my opinion, that the MT is correct. 125. Cf. the previous occurrence of the words 'she bowed down' (v. 16).

92

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets And the king swore and said, As the Lord lives, who has redeemed my soul... even as I swore to thee by the Lord God of Israel saying Indeed, Solomon thy son shall reign after me, and he shall sit upon my throne in my stead

This oath is actually divided into three elements, two of which include the formulaic version of the vow. The comparative phrase 'As the Lord lives ... even as I swore to thee ...' (v. 9) and the main sentence 'even so will I certainly do this day' (v. 9) appear in parallel. And in the third element, the pivot element, we find the content of the vow, in which the following sentences stand out: Indeed Solomon thy son shall reign after me my throne in my stead.

and he shall sit upon

This portion of the text includes a prominent parallel against a background which surrounds it and which attracts the attention. It recurs in vv. 24 and 35, at the peripheries of the pivot pattern in parallel, as well as in vv. 13 and 17, which emphasize this parallel (cf. Bar-Efrat 1979: 28). It should be mentioned that David repeats this parallel (twice) in his vow (v. 30),126 precisely as it is stated by Bathsheba (v. 17), as Nathan instructed her (v. 13) (he adds only the words, 'in my stead'). There is, here, an unequivocal confirmation of the oath, as it is outlined by Bathsheba. The addition of the words 'in my stead' should be understood in the light of David's decision to enact the vow forthwith. Nathan and Bathsheba only use the inflected preposition, 'after me' i and thereby refer to a time after the king's death. But David himself sees fit to place Solomon on his throne immediately and during his lifetime, and therefore uses the word 'in my stead', and even in his lifetime. The first time David uses this parallelism with the addition of the words 'in my stead, subsequent to, after me' (v. 30). On the second occasion (v. 35) it has galvanized him completely. It should be understood, therefore, that on the first occasion the idea (to cause Solomon to reign immediately) was born, while on the second occasion it had become a firm decision in the consciousness of the king (BarEfrat 1979: 31). David's vow at the climax of the pattern implies that the object of the vow is also of significance (vv. 13, 17, 30): Nathan instructs Bathsheba 126. It would seem that this passage is structured in accordance with Num. 30.3: 'If a man vow a vow to the Lord, or swear an oath ... he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth.'

2. Decree and Implementation

93

to declare: 'Didst not thou, my lord, O king, swear to thy handmaid saying'; Bathsheba says to David: 'My lord, didst thou not swear by the Lord thy God to thy handmaid saying'; and in David's oath he says: 'as I have sworn to thee by the Lord God of Israel saying'. And David bestows the final form of an official announcement on this solemn oath in this way: 'by the Lord God of Israel'. This addendum, made in the name of the Lord, obliges him to fulfil the vow with greater gravity.127 Bathsheba mentions David's oath to him, and he replies to her with an oath (Rabbi Josef Kara). There is, therefore, a pivot pattern which consists in the main of two speeches, that of Nathan and that of David as a question and a response. In David's utterances (12 stichoi), we find 7 stichoi that include decrees in parallel to Nathan's request-amazement. I may conclude from this that Nathan's words (and Bathsheba's prior to his) had considerable influence on the king, and the narrator shows us this by the clear parallels in the pivot pattern. The juxtaposition of the two sections sharpens the observation of the incidents in inverted form, in that the stage in the first problematic presentation is repeated in inverted form, when it is corrected: Nathan is astonished at the appointment of Adonijah as king, by David, without his being informed—and finally David instructs him (together with Zadok and Benaiah) to appoint Solomon as king, with great urgency (see Frisch 1986: 133). In the middle, between Nathan's speech and David's response, which is expressed in his orders to those loyal to him, we find the central pivot of the structure in which the meeting and the conversation between David and Bathsheba is described, while at the centre of the pattern—at its climax—we find David's vow, that: Indeed, Solomon thy son shall reign after me, and he shall sit upon my throne in my stead

The matter of Solomon's enthronement constitutes the central pivot of the chapter, and of the picture before us. It is the cause of the conflict, the machinations and the plots and schemes in the king's court, and it is with good reason that it is mentioned four times in the chapter: in David's reply to Bathsheba (vv. 28-31), in David's command to his officers (vv. 32-37), in the description of the implementation of the command (see Langlamet 1976: 488) (vv. 38-40), and in Jonathan the son of Abiathar's report to Adonijah and his faction (vv. 41-49). This is 127. Cf. Alter 1988: 17; Savran 1988: 124.

94

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

in parallel to the previous action: initially Nathan prods Bathsheba into raising the subject before the king (v. 13), and this she does (v. 17) and Nathan reinforces all that she says (v. 24). The promise is kept—and Solomon is crowned king (v. 39). The conflict has (merely) drawn to a close (see v. 53). 10. Summary It would seem that an episode describing a decree and its implementation is most suited to the structure of the pivot pattern. By using the same words to describe the implementation of the decree,128 the writer indicates its complete execution. The repetition is made to display the standpoint of the one issuing the command or the one implementing it, or the relationship between the two (cf. Steinberg 1977: 121). There is a response to each decree, but there is a difference in the implementation of each one. The majority of the decrees are reacted to immediately, whether the response is described within the structure or outside of it.129 The Lord's decree to the man of God (1 Kgs 13) receives a response twice, but on the third occasion the decree is nullified; and Na'aman is angered and argumentative on hearing the decree and does not implement it immediately in accordance with Elisha's instructions (2 Kgs 5.8-15). The order of the elements in a decree—implementation structure, which usually follow one another in immediate succession, generally adhere to the chronological scheme of events, the command occurring before its implementation. The exception is the structure which deals with the words of the man of God, and God's words to him (1 Kgs 13), where the issue is the same, but the order changes:130 the implementation or rather the non-implementation appears before the decree. It would have been expected that the description of the implementation would come at the end of the structure, in contradistinction to the 128. But we will encounter structures, too, that contain interchanges of words, mainly verbs: in 1 Kgs 13 and 2 Kgs 5.8-15, verbs with the radicals 'goreturn' are interchanged between the decree and its implementation. In 1 Kgs 17.2, 5 Elijah is instructed 'and hide thyself. In the implementation it is written: 'and he dwelt'. Na'aman receives an instruction from Elisha 'bathe'. In the implementation it is written 'and he dipped himself (2 Kgs 5.10, 14). 129. 1 Kgs 2.31-34; 1 Kgs 17.2-7; Judg. 7.17; 1 Sam. 3.17; 1 Sam. 8.7-9; 1 Kgs 1.24-35. 130. Possibly to emphasize that the decree was not implemented.

2. Decree and Implementation

95

decree at its commencement. Nevertheless, in two of the structures this was not the case (1 Kgs 17.2-7; 2 Kgs 5.8-15). As we are dealing here with the description of a decree and its implementation it is not surprising that verbs taken from the radical i recur in the majority of the structures (six out of eight), periodically in a parallel pattern between the stichoi (Judg. 7.17; 1 Sam. 8.719), occasionally at the centre of the pattern (1 Sam. 3.17 [in the vow], 1 Kgs 17.2-7) and periodically within the decree itself (1 Kgs 2.31-34; 2 Kgs 5.8 -15). In contrast to those structures where the issue is an 'action and its outcome' (see below), where the narrator's words are expressed in the main, we find that in the structures in this chapter the decree is issued by one of the characters (the Lord to his prophet, a king [judge] to those who serve him, or a prophet to his preacher: in any case a character who is in a position of power can order anyone who is subject to him to do his bidding) in direct speech, and the direct response to this is almost without delay (in direct speech). Presenting the decree in direct speech is explained by the fact that this is the shortest and simplest approach (cf. Gelender 1983: 45). The implementation is usually presented by the narrator. In the majority of the structures we find utterances by one character only, followed by the implementation. Only in two of the structures (1 Kgs 1.24-35; 2 Kgs 5.8-15) do we find dialogue between a number of the characters, with either the decree at its conclusion (1 Kgs 1) or the implementation (2 Kgs 5). An examination of the various examples indicates that completeness in the pivot pattern, which is expressed by perfect correspondence between the decree and its implementation, occurs in a number of structures: in the words of the Lord to Elijah (1 Kgs 17.2-7), in what the prophet says (1 Kgs 13) and in the description of Solomon's command to strike Joab down (1 Kgs 2.31-34). A close scrutiny of the structures revealed that certain of them comprise a decree or a decree and its implementation only,131 and it is obvious why these structures are particularly brief. But periodically words of explanation or even debate are found within the decree,132 and these patterns are extended.133 131. 1 Kgs 13, 17.2-7; Judg. 7.17; 1 Sam. 3.17. 132. 1 Kgs 2.31-34; 2 Kgs 5.8-15; 1 Sam. 8.7-9; 1 Kgs 1.24-35. 133. With the exception of the pattern containing the words of the Lord to Samuel (1 Sam. 8.7-9).

96

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Included in this chapter are four patterns (the last ones quoted in the chapter) in which we only find a decree, in that the implementation is not included in the pattern. That notwithstanding, the decree is structured in accordance with a perfect pivot pattern, in order to give emphasis to the incident and its significance, when the utterances of the issuer of the decree are parallel both in the opening and the conclusion of the episode. It is possible to explain the occurrence of a decree on its own in these structures: in the degree of reluctance by Samuel to respond to the request-demand of the speaker (Eli [1 Sam. 3.17], the Lord [1 Sam. 8.7-9]). Because of this the speaker repeats himself twice in order to emphasize the attempt to convince Samuel. The repetition appears both in parallel and inverted form, in the process of creating a pivot pattern; and this is the case as well with David's reaction to Bathsheba and Nathan (regarding his failure to act against Adonijah timeously) in words similar to those which he heard, and the inclusion of these expressions creates a pivot pattern: this happens, too, in order to emphasize the confidence of Gideon, who repeats his orders before the battle against the Midianites (Judg. 7.17), after he had expressed at length his qualms with regard to leading the nation, including 'importuning' the Lord to give him signs, something which we do not find with any other judge. In the majority of the patterns we find impressively precise parallelism between the decree and its implementation. Changes in diction are extremely rare.

Chapter 3 ACTION AND OUTCOME

1. Introduction In this chapter I shall be considering pivot patterns in which an action (or a situation) and its outcome are mentioned, the outcome flowing directly from the action,1 the majority of which consist of similar or even identical words in parallel. The number of structures in this chapter (nine) is greater than in the other chapters. I will therefore give my attention to the reason for the increase in the appearance of this type of structural model. The repetitive components, action and its outcome, constitute events concerning everything which is integrated into the process of the overall action and which fulfils a significant role in propelling it forward (cf. Sternberg 1977: 114). In these models I shall not find the words of the characters, but only those of the interlocutor, who knows all and who describes the action and its results, the reason for which I shall raise in the analysis of the patterns. I will attempt to establish whether the sequence of action and its outcome are situated at the centre of the pivot pattern, and if not I shall seek the reason for why this is so. The majority of the structures in this chapter deal with different types of violence (death, robbery, conquest, kidnapping). I shall investigate why this topic of varieties of violence has been chosen to illustrate this category of the model.2 1. Apparently there is a similarity between this model and the model describing decree and implementation, in which an action which is implemented in accordance with the decree is described, and where there is a consequence which flows from the action. 2. Attention should be given to the fact that among nine structures whose concern is action and outcome there are eight that deal with violence, whereas in the

98

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets 2. Summary of the Reign ofAbimelech (Judges 9.56-57) A

Thus God made reparation for the wickedness of Abimelech, X which he did to his father, in slaying his seventy brothers. (v. 56) A' And all of the evil i of the men of Shechem did God requite upon their heads: and upon them came the curse of Jotham the son of Jeruba'al (v. 57)

In the pericope under discussion we find a summary of the reign of Abimelech as presented by the narrator. The pericope constitutes the conclusion of the history of Abimelech's reign (Ch. 9). The author of this section causes Jotham to relate a parable (vv. 7-20) at the end of which he explains the lesson learnt from it. At first sight the story terminates with v. 55 with the familiar stylistic formula 'they departed everyman to his place'.3 But, in fact, it is vv. 56-57 which bring the episode to an end (Talshir 1982: 73). They connect with the opening of the chapter, 'And Abimelech the son of Jeruba'al went to Shechem to his mother's bretheren' (9.1), and they comprise the verses which form the framework of 'Abimelech's story'. These verses make a twofold contribution: (a)

(b)

They forge a connection between Abimelech's fate and the nobility of Shechem with Jotham's parable and more precisely, with the moral of the parable and the curse: 'but if not... and devour Abimelech' (v. 20). They reintroduce into the story (see vv. 23-24) the dimension of divine protection, that is to say, dual causality.4 In these stories we encounter the dimension of the co-incidental, natural development of events, or, in other words, concealed divine protection in revealed history (cf. Kaufmann 1962: 212).

eight patterns whose topic is decree and implementation only one concerns itself with death. In three structures in which the language of reprimand occurs one deals with violence, and among the five patterns whose topic is request and prayer violence is mentioned in three. 3. Judg. 7.7 for example, as well as 1 Sam. 26.25. See Seeligmann 1992: 48. 4. Regarding the dual causality cf. Seeligmann (1992a: 73ff.) as well as Amit (1987a: principally the note on p. 387).

3. Action and Outcome

99

I also find the phenomenon of 'measure for measure'5 in the episode under consideration. It is no wonder, then, that it is arranged in a pivot pattern.6 With regard to a concentric structure such as this, it is characteristic periodically to find sentence-like pericopes that serve the idea of reciprocity and that determine the punishment of the sinner in terms of 'measure for measure', similar to the lex talionis. Here too, as in other texts,7 the view that God punishes man with measure for measure is significant, and is connected with the belief that a just God repays man according to his deeds. Thus God made reparation (v. 56)—This is an introduction to verses which do not relate details of a particular incident, but which include an explanation of, or comment on, the event. With a key point such as this one, the conclusion of the Abimelech story, the narrator interrupts the sequence of events and adds explanatory and elucidatory comments of his own, using his own idiom. By utilizing this device, the narrator diverts his readers' attention from the sequence of the plot. The explanatory remarks of the narrator are a powerful tool in his hand for transmitting his message to his readers and for conveying his world view unequivocally and with utmost clarity (Bar-Efrat 1980: 56). Thus God made reparation for the wickedness of Abimelech—and we find in the parallel element that the men of Schechem are referred to: and all of the evil of the men of Shechem did God requite upon their heads. The phrase mentioned which indicates measure for measure is repeated many times in this form: in Gen. 50.15, 'and will pay us back the evil which we did to him', and so also 'and the Lord did return the evil of Nabal on his head' (1 Sam. 25.39).8 And with the converse connotation, it indicates positive reciprocity: 'and the Lord recompenses 5. Cf. Miller 1982: 35; Boogaart 1985: 46, 49. Cf. too: Isa. 8.5-8, 17.12-14; Amos 9.1-4; Mic. 1.7; Ps. 7.17; etc. 6. Fritz (1982: 143) joins v. 56 to vv. l-5a, 6, 23, 25 and 50-54, and v. 57 he perceives as a later editorial edition. But this opinion regarding the division of these verses is not acceptable, in that the pivot pattern testifies to the correctness of their position. 7. 1 Sam. 15.23; Jer. 5.19; etc. Cf. Loewenstamm 1963: 844-45. 8. This applies as well to 1 Kgs 2.32, 44; 2 Chron. 6.23. Attention should be given to the fact that the double expression 'wicked is in contrast to 'good : 'Neither did they show kindness to the house of Jeruba'al Gideon, according to all the goodness (Judg. 8.35); 'if you have dealt well with Jeruba'al and his house' (9.16).

100

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

me according to my righteousness' (2 Sam. 22.25 = Ps. 18.25). The Lord appears here as a judge who determines the fate of man. God's actions are retaliation for evil, and this concept of retaliatory action appears in Judg. 9.23 and 24 as well. The narrator interrupts the narrative flow of the plot here as well and adds his explanatory comments on the action (as a form of introduction to our vv. 56-57): then God sent an evil spirit the men of Shechem

between Abimelech and

and in parallel to the pericope: Thus God made reparation for the wickedn elech ... and all the evil of the men of Shechem.

bim-

The linking of divine protection with a realistic description is created here by mentioning God only at the beginning of the second section of the chapter (vv. 23-24) and at its conclusion (vv. 56-57), in fact. He does not participate in the unfolding of the plot. In other words: the existing situation is the fruit of the spirit of God and his divine presence. I have seen, therefore, that the narrator connects (at the commencement of the structure) Abimelech, whom God punishes, with the people of Shechem, who are his relatives and who crown him king (at the conclusion of the structure), and that God has turned their evil upon their heads. And there is almost a perfect parallelism here (the difference between and the completion of the phrase 'upon their heads —referring to the men of Shechem). But at the climax of the pattern only Abimelech is spoken of, he being the principal (and negative) role player in the chapter: which he did to his father in slaying his seventy brothers (v. 56)—the gravest sin. The transgression of Abimelech is placed at the climax of the structure—the slaying of his father's house,9 70 of his brothers.10 These issues remind us of the utterances of Adonibezek who admitted before his death, 'as I have done, so God has requited me' (Judg. 1.7)—measure for measure.11 In these words, placed at the pivot of the pattern, and which describe Abimelech's egregious transgression, there is a close connection to 9. The connotation here of 'his father' is the house of his father, as in Deut. 26.5: 'An Aramaean nomad was my father and he went down to Egypt.' Bendor 1986: 51. Cf. Judg. 9.5: 'the house of his father'. 10. A symbolic number. Cf. Num. 11.16, Judg. 8.30, etc. 11. He too speaks of 'seventy kings'.

3. Action and Outcome

101

Jotham's words and to those of the narrator himself in Judg. 9.23-24. Verses 56-57 are therefore placed at the conclusion of the story of Abimelech and elucidate what happened to him and to the men of Shechem in retaliation for the evil which they did, and as the realization of Jotham's curse12 (and the termination of the structure and the chapter re-inforce this assumption). 3. The Philistines' Defeat following Goliath's Death (1 Samuel 17.51-54) A

Therefore David ran, and stood upon the Philistine, and took his sword, and drew it out of its sheath, and slew him, and with it he cut off his head. And when the Philistines saw that their champion was dead, they fled. (v. 51) B And the men of Israel and of Judah arose , and shouted, and pursued the Philistines (v. 52) C Until the approaches of Gei, and to the gates of Ekron. X And the dead of the Philistines fell by the way to Sha 'arayim. C and to Gath and to Ekron. B' And the children of Israel returned from chasing after the Philistines, and they plundered their tents. (v. 53) A' And David took the head of the Philistine and brought it to Jerusalem; and he put his armour in his tent. (v. 54)

The main issue in this episode is David's slaying of Goliath, which causes the Philistines defeat and retreat to their cities in the face of the children of Israel. In vv. 48-50 the slaying of Goliath by David with a sling and a stone is described. In vv. 51-54 occurs the second stage of the battle: after David has mortally wounded Goliath from afar, he draws near to him and kills him. His death constitutes the framework of the Philistine defeat, which is situated at the centre of the pivot pattern but is not its chief component. There are those who maintain that v. 54, in which Jerusalem is mentioned, is an anachronism, in that Jerusalem was a Jebusite and not an Israelite city, and that this verse therefore does not belong in this pericope.13 But the pivot pattern under consideration, which includes 12. Abramsky's opinion (1980: 164) is not acceptable, because this passage was added only after the addition of the parable of Jotham, in order to demonstrate the existence of the curse, in that verbal connections occur with the narrative itself, as mentioned, and not only with Jotham's curse. 13. Fokkelman (1986: 208) is of the opinion that its proximity to v. 57 (NB the

102

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

vv. 51-54, indicates that v. 54 does belong here,14 and the question of the mention of Jerusalem, which does in fact represent a difficulty (from an historical point of view), does not invalidate the verse. I am not dealing with the chronology of the story, which may or may not be later in history,15 for this is not my concern. A historical problem, it should be emphasized, is not the same as a literary one. Anachronisms are never a valid reason for the removal of a phrase or verse from the story, but simply bear witness to the fact that the narrative was written at a later stage. Therefore David ran, and stood upon the Philistine, and took his sword... and with it he cut off his head. The second stage of the battle between David and Goliath commences with David's running towards the expiring Goliath ('and he slew him' [v. 50]). The first stage also commences with David running towards the Philistine, when taking the initiative: 'And David hastened, and ran to the enemy line towards the Philistine ... and took from there a stone'16 (vv. 48-49). But after he has slain him, there is no necessity for him to run with such great speed in order for him to take up an advantageous position, as he had done previously, and therefore the words 'and he hastened' are not repeated here (as in v. 48). David stands next to17 = the Philistine, 'is close to him because at the time of his striking him with the stone, he stood afar' (Metzudat David), he takes Goliath's sword18 and finally slays Goliath, that is to say: as Goliath was expiring, he killed him, first with the sling,

parallelism between 'and he took and he brought it') indicates the lateness of the inclusion of this verse and the fact that it does not belong to this pericope. He designates vv. 41-53 as a single unit (p. 178), but this does not appear to me to be correct. 14. Yazon asserts (1976: 25, 32) that this section vv. 51-54 represents one unit, by name: David defeats and slays Goliath. 15. Rofe dwells on its late inclusion into the narrative (1986: 65, 77). 16. There is an additional parallelism between two stages of the battle: 'and David put his hand in his bag and took a stone and slung it and struck" (v. 49)—and took his sword and slew him' (v. 51). 17. The text reflects on his prayer (1 Sam. 22.39-40): 'and they fell beneath my feet'. 18. In vv. 5-7 a sword is not mentioned. Possibly he took his spear? (McCarter 1980). The words 'and drew it out of his sheath' are deleted in LXX, and this expression occurs in Judg. 9.54.

3. Action and Outcome

103

and now with the sword.19 He decapitates him, as an indication of victory, until the event of his death will be made public and the miracle done for Israel will be broadcast (Rabbi Levi ben Gershom). The tempo of the events in v. 51 is rapid, and this is given expression to by word pairs—and testifies to the rapidity of events.20 In the hemistich that is parallel in the structure, the following is stated: And David took the head of the Philistine and brought it to Jerusalem; and he put his armour in his tent (54).

The connection to the commencement of the pericope is clear: there he takes Goliath's sword, and here he takes his head. He cut off the head of the Philistine with the sword: and this is the head which he now takes and brings to Jerusalem,21 and his armour, obviously including his sword, he places in his tent.22 In the second line of the structure is found the following sentence: And the men of Israel and of Judah arose, and shouted, and pursued the Philistines—as a result of the Philistines not having fulfilled the conditions stipulated before the war: 'If he will be able to fight with me, and to kill me, then we will be your servants' (v. 9). But they fled, and the people of Israel and of Judah rose up and pursued them. The people of Judah here are mentioned separately. After this remarkable victory and the vanquishing of the Philistines, they are called the people of Israel (and the people of Judah 19. Cf. Judg. 9.54; 1 Sam. 14.13; 2 Sam. 1.16. 20. Bar-Efrat 1980: 17; Fokkelman 1986: 178. Cf. 'the enemy said, I will pursue, I will overtake, I will divide the spoil' (Exod. 15.9-10). 21. The issue of Jerusalem is difficult, not to the body of the narrative, but to its background, its history, and it is not clear why it is of concern here. It is in fact a Jebusite city. The explanations given are not relevant to this study. 22. The sword was in a holy place entrusted to Ahimelech, the Priest of Nob, and kept behind 'the breastplate' (1 Sam. 21.10). So there are those who read 'in his tent as in the tent of the Lord: the letters yod or he are both abbreviated forms of God's name (not an unusual phenomenon in Scripture, e.g. Tur-Sinai 1965). Ehrlich maintains that it should read 'in the tent' as the waw is dittography of the following word (55), and there are those who read 'the tent of the Lord' because the Philistines placed Saul's weapons in the house of Astarte (31.10) and the Ark of the Lord in the house of Dagon (1 Sam. 5.2). See, too, 1 Kgs 1.39. Apropos of this there is considerable significance attached to the question of whether the phrase is 'his tent' or 'the tent of the Lord'. Why is this so? If in fact the passage intends to teach that David's strength is drawn from the strength of the Lord, then the placing of the weapons in the tent of the Lord expresses David's recognition of this.

104

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

are no longer mentioned) (v. 53). So the victory has made its mark on the nation, and the narrator gives expression to this by changing the name. In contrast to 'and the men of Israel and of Judah rose up' (v. 52), we find in the parallel element: 'the children of Israel returned' (v. 53).

This verb pair, which indicates the commencement of the attack and the return from it, is situated in the description of the battle between the children of Israel and Judah against Mesha the king of Moab: 'And the children of Israel rose up and smote Moab ... and returned to their land' (2 Kgs 3.24, 27). And also: 'And the ambush rose quickly out of their place ... then all Israel returned to Ai' (Josh. 8.19, 24). I find the words 'and they pursued... and they returned' in the book of Joshua (Josh. 10.10,15,21). The children of Israel pursue the Philistines, just as they had pursued them in the second conflict at Ebenezer: 'and pursued the Philistines and smote them' (1 Sam. 7.11). In the parallel element in the structure is found 'and the children of Israel returned from chasing after the Philistines' (v. 53). 23 is and this pair of words is encountered a number of times in Scripture: And it was told Laban ... that Jacob was fled and he pursued after him. And Jacob answered and said to Laban, what is my trespass and what is my sin, that thou hast so hotly pursued after me (Gen. 31.23, 36). Woe to them that rise up early in the morning to pursue strong drink that continue until night till wine inflame them (Isa. 5.11—a double meaning).24

This occurs also in Lam. 4.19 and Ps. 7.2, 4. In the text under review, as in Genesis and Psalms, the word pair is in parallel, but not in the same verse. In 1 Sam. 17.52 the situation is clear, with the verbs appearing in parallel elements of the pivot pattern. In the third element 23. The radical is Aramaic. Cf. Ibn Jannach in his book HaRikmah: 'it (wine pursued them) is in fact the opposite and the sentence "wine will pursue him" actually means: they will pursue strong drink but this indicates that this verb means pursue'. Ibn Ezra says: 'it pursued them, takes two objects from the conjugation, "that thou hast so hotly pursued after me" (Gen. 31.36)'. Cf. Skehan (1976) on the two radicals in this section of the text and in LXX as well as the twofold meaning of the radical 24. Cf. Yellin 1983: 258-59.

3. Action and Outcome

105

of the structure and in parallel with it, the fifth element, we find words indicating place: Until the approaches of Get, and to the gates of Ekron and to Gath, and to Ekron (v. 52)

In LXX VV and LXX LV we find 'Gath' in place of 'Gei'. This would appear to be correct as the text is not referring to a valley between the opposing camps, because if that were so it would have stated 'the valley '. So the connection between the elements becomes more pronounced. The pursuit which takes place to these places is reminiscent of another instance of pursuit (1 Sam. 7.11), that of the Philistines, in which the name of the place is mentioned: 'until they came under Beth Kar'. It would seem that the names of the places are mentioned to show the overwhelming defeat of the Philistines, who fled from the Valley of Ela to their cities on the plain (17.2). Gath is mentioned by name, possibly ironically, because this is the city of Goliath, who boasted that he would smite David and the children of Israel would be his slaves. The wheel has come full circle, and now the Philistines have fled, vanquished and in disarray (17.4). At the climax of the pivot pattern we encounter the words: And the dead of the Philistines fell by the way to Sha'arayim (v. 52). Sha'arayim is one of the cities situated on the Judaean plain, which is mentioned in Josh. 15.36 after Socho and Azekah. And therefore there are those who read here: 'on the way from Sha'arayim to Gath'. Attention should be given to the fact that in the words of Goliath when stipulating the conditions of war (v. 9) he states as follows: 'If he be able to fight with me, and to kill me ... but if I prevail against him and kill him )'. And in 1 Sam. 7.11 as well, we find 'and pursued 1 ... and smote them ( !)'. I encounter this too in 2 Kgs 3.24, 'Israel rose up and smote Moab, so that they fled before them'. In the episode under review it is not stated that the children of Israel defeated the Philistines, even though it is clear that they did so and that the defeat was total ('and they plundered their tents'—v. 53). The phrase 'and the dead of the Philistines fell occurs 25 frequently in Scripture, and is reminiscent of the defeat of the children of Israel and Saul and his sons on Gilboa (as mentioned): 'and fell down slain in Mount Gilboa' (1 Sam. 31.1). To summarize the pivot pattern under consideration: the flight of the 25. In the book of Ezekiel alone it is mentioned nine times!

106

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Philistines before the children of Israel until they reach their cities is described between the account of the decapitating by David of their hero Goliath and the report of his being brought to Jerusalem. The description of the severing of his head and its result is presented both at the beginning and the conclusion of the structure in verses which are terse in the extreme (Yazon 1976: 24). The stage of the war in which David goes out against Goliath and defeats him is described here.26 And the language is similar. In vv. 52-53 the detail is greater (Yazon 1976: 24) and they contain an account of the children of Israel pursuing the Philistines after Goliath has been vanquished,27 and are in parallel one against the other in the structure. The pursuit of the Philistines by the children of Israel is described in contradistinction to their return from intensive pursuit Presentation of place names gives emphasis to the gravity of the defeat which the Philistines suffered at the hand of Israel. At the centre of the structure is 'And the dead of the Philistines feW as a consequence of the defeat of their hero, Goliath. And David the young hero is the one responsible for his death. From this it may be seen that David's heroism described here at the periphery of the structure actually gave rise to the defeat of the Philistines with the death of their hero. Their defeat is an expression of Israel's victory (and not exactly David's) and a temporary cessation of hostilities between the two nations. It would seem that in this structure, as in a number of others,28 the principal idea does not feature at the climax of the pattern, but at its peripheries. And the episode is presented in order to glorify David's heroism in succeeding in killing Goliath, clad in armour from head to foot, with the limited weaponry of sling and stone. The description of David's victory achieved in the name of the Lord of Hosts, God, of the forces of Israel, against him who came with sword spear and javelin (v. 45), is designed according to this model to elevate David at the beginning of his career. The defeat of the Philistines, which is described 26. As in folk myths where the hero goes out to battle against his adversary and defeats him. Yazon 1976: 27. 27. This phase also corresponds to a phase in folk literature where the congregation believes that the hero has been victorious and proceeds to make the victory a part of reality (Yazon 1976: 24, 27). 28. See 1 Sam. 3; 17; 2 Sam. 3.36; 1 Kgs 4.20-5.5; 2 Kgs 5.18, 15.18-21; 19.15-19, and the concluding section of this chapter, as well.

3. Action and Outcome

107

in the middle of the structure, is a result of David's brilliant action as mentioned at the edge of the pattern. 4. The Philistines' Abuse of King Saul's Body and their Message (1 Samuel 31.9-10)29 A

And they cut off his head. (v. 9) and stripped off his armour X and sent into the land of the Philistines round about, to publish it in the house of their idols and among the people B' And they put his armour in the house of Astarte: (v. 10) A' and his body they fastened to the wall of Beth Shean B

These verses, which form pivot patterns, constitute a brief episode (which describes an action without an outcome) within a much larger picture, vv. 8-13,30 in which the desecration of Saul the king's body and its subsequent repossession together with the bodies of his sons, and their burial by the men of Jabesh Gilad, is described. In vv. 9-10 the narrator describes the mutilation of Saul's body by the Philistines and their joy at having being victorious. Besides the form (a pivot pattern) and the content (the narrator's focusing on the Philistines' deeds concerning Saul's corpse) there is an additional structural proof which makes vv. 9-10 an independent episode. I encounter a combination of a number of sentences here, the last of which is different structurally from those before it, and which connects those sentences which precede it into one episode. This finds its expression in this episode, where there are four verbs at the beginning of the sentence, and then the last sentence begins with a noun for the sake of variation.31 Which ever way it is clear that we have a unified episode before us.32 Saul's sons are not mentioned in these verses. But they are mentioned previously (vv. 6, 7, 8, 12, 13). I can infer from this that the Philistine viewpoint differs from the viewpoint expressed in this chapter, in that, from the perspective of the narrator, we are concerned with 29. Cf. Fokkelman 1986: 627. 30. Segal (1964) who does not see vv. 9-10 as a separate entity. 31. Cf. Ezek. 24.10. Additional examples are to be found in Mirsky 1977. 32. Attention should be given to the fact that v. 8 and vv. 11-13 are not attached to the framework of verses mentioned above, from the point of view of their introduction and the change which takes place in one of them as in vv. 9-10.

108

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Saul, his three sons, his armourbearer and all his men (v. 6), after which we have the perspective of the children of Israel, which includes the men of Israel, Saul and his three sons (v. 7). The point of view of the Philistines includes Saul and his three sons (v. 8), and vv. 9-10 Saul alone. This selectivity of information is the hallmark of the Philistine perception, the reducing of the number of characters; and the focusing on the character of Saul, or rather on his corpse, creates the contrast between the perception of the Philistines, the desecrators of corpses, and the narrator (Sternberg 1982: 119). The description of this mutilation appears immediately after the description of their discovery of the bodies of Saul and his sons on Mount Gilboa: 'and they cut off his head".33 On the parallel side of the pattern, with regard to the last line, 'and his body they fastened to the wall of Beth Shean', in 1 Chron. 10.10 a somewhat different version appears: 'and they fastened his skull in Beth Dagon'. The Radak comments (as does Abarbanel), 'What is not mentioned in the first instance is mentioned in the second, in fact both incidents took place, because: they fastened his body in Beth Shean and his skull in Beth Dagon'. But why are both these incidents not stated in detail here and in Chronicles? The text in the book of Chronicles is the original, as the parallelism between his head and his skull accords more precisely with this type of pattern, and reinforces the correctness of the version in the book of Chronicles. In the parallel elements of the chiasmus there is a description of an atrocity, the mutiliation of Saul's body: they first cut off his head and then fixed his body (cf. v. 10.12 and 1 Chron. 10.12—'bodies') on the wall as a spectacle, so that all those entering and leaving Beth Shean would see what befalls the enemy. Saul's armour is already mentioned in B and B'. Initially it is stated as follows: 'and they stripped off34hisarmour'35 It is obvious that the 33. See the discussion on 1 Sam. 17.51-54 in this study for the close link between this episode and the narrative of David and Goliath. The custom of mutilating bodies is not often documented in Israel (despite the fact that the heads of Ishbosheth and Sheva Ben Bichri were mentioned), but the practice was widespread in Assyria and Greece. The Assyrians boasted about this practice. See Humphreys 1980: 84. 34. See Mic. 3.3, Job 19.9. 35. David was Saul's 'armour bearer' in his youth (1 Sam. 16.21). Is this word

3. Action and Outcome

109

narrator, in referring to his armour, includes his clothes and his weapons (Deut. 22.5) (Mez. Z.) and the reference is to what the Philistines found after they had come to strip the slain (1 Sam. 31.8). 'And they put his armour in the house ofAstarte' (v. 10) is on the parallel side of the pattern. In the first two lines of the pericope we find two sentences consisting of three words with possessive pronomini in the third person and with the same syntactical pattern. In the two final lines we find sentences with a similar syntactical pattern, but the final sentence opens with the object to distinguish it from those prior to it, and in order to emphasize the absolute depth of his degredation: 'his body'. Both pairs of sentences describe the demise of Saul.36 The subject of these, as well as the one at the climax of the pattern, is the Philistines, and in each sentence there is only one verb. There is no direct reference to Saul at the climax of the pattern (he is not mentioned either as the object [of the verb] or as an attributive), except as the subject of the rejoicing and the good tidings—the death of Saul, king of the enemy: 'and [they] sent into the land of the Philistines to publish it in the house of their idols and among the people'.31 In 1 Chron. 10.9, as well as in LXX, it is written somewhat differently, the particle followed by 'the idols', in place of 'the house (of their idols)'. Possibly the word 'house' emanates from the following verse ('the house of Astarte'), the meaning being, to announce to the gods themselves, to the idols,38 who were also awaiting the outcome of the war (Segal 1964). The Philistines regarded the defeat of Saul and of Israel as a divine as well as a physical victory. They therefore exulted in bringing the good news to their idols as well as to the people.39 The emphasized twice in order to draw our attention to the textual passage mentioned? 36. Miscall (1986) sees an early reference to Saul's death in David's words to Abishai: 'or he shall descend into battle and be swept away' (1 Sam. 26.10). 37. This incident is similar to what takes place in the Samson story. There, the Philistines gather in the house (of Dagon), in order to rejoice at the capture of Samson their enemy (Judg. 16.23-24). 38. This is an appellation of disgrace for idols that represent the divine. The word appears frequently in the Bible. Cf. Schroer 1987: 315-17. 39. The bringing of the tidings is expressed in the following way: the piel is used. Many researchers recommend reading the verb in the qal form inter alia: Driver 1960 and McCarter 1980. But this does not appear to be correct. Cf. Segal 1964, and possibly the piel form occurs in order to correspond with what is stated in the previous episode, 'and he sent of the spoil to the

110

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

sentence that was placed at the centre of the structure is the longest in the pericope. It describes the ecstatic joy of the victors as they dispatch emissaries to take the glad tidings of their victory to the length and breadth of Philistia. Saul is not mentioned in this sentence even indirectly, but, in the wake of his death, the Philistines bring the good news to the nation and to its gods. These good tidings (the verb 'to announce is placed exactly in the middle of the central sentence) that are the essence of the pattern constitute an anticipatory allusion to the portion of the text in David's lament for Saul and Jonathan: 'publish it not in the streets of Ashkelon' (2 Sam. 1.20) (Fokkelman 1986: 627). The Philistines' ecstatic response is described by the narrator in a (relatively) long sentence. In a pivot pattern, he presents us with five sentences, in four of which he details the Philistines' desecration of King Saul's body and his weapons. It appears to them that the defeat of Saul and of Israel is as a result of their idols—their gods, and therefore they announce the death to their idols and to the nation. This sentence is positioned therefore at the pivot of the structure. The author has chosen to shape this section of the story as a pivot pattern in order to emphasize the defeat of Saul and of Israel and their humiliation at the hands of the Philistines and, principally, their announcement to the nation, until they display the King of Israel's corpse (his skull) hanging as an exhibit, a sign of their decisive victory, after years of bloody struggle. This defeat and Saul's death provide the opening for David's ascent to the throne. 5. David's Reaction to the Death of the Child (2 Samuel 12.16-20) The description of David's mourning and the dialogue with his servants constitutes a scene on a broader canvas. It comprises mainly that which is said by the narrator, who presents us with David's actions, his servants thoughts and an extremely brief dialogue consisting,(in Hebrew) of three words ('Is the child dead?' 'He is dead!'). Therefore the scene before us is out of the ordinary, in that generally we find dialogue that propels both plot and action forward. Here, in the description of David's mourning, the narrator chooses to present David's actions rather than his words. In a time of mourning such as elders of Judah' (30.26), hinting that the Philistines' glee was premature, because even before they had sent to announce their victory David had sent and announced his own, and was about to nullify theirs.

3. Action and Outcome

111

this is it is more fitting for David to remain silent! It is only in vv. 2123 that we encounter a dialogue between David and his servants. They request an explanation of his actions and he explains. A

And David fasted and went in and lay all night upon the ground. And the elders of his house arose and went to him to raise him up from the ground, but he would not, neither would (vv. 16-17) he eat bread B And it came to pass on the seventh day that the child died (v. 18) C And the servants of David feared to tell him that the child was dead X for they said, Behold while the child was yet alive, we spoke to him and he would not hearken to our voice: how then shall we tell him that the child is dead, and he will do himself a mischief. C' But when David saw that his servants whispered, (v. 19) David understood that the child was dead: B' therefore David said to his servants, is the child dead? and they said he is dead. A' Then David arose from the ground and washed, and (v. 20) anointed himself, and changed his apparel and came into the house of the Lord and bowed down, then he came to his own house and asked them to set bread before him, and he did eat.

After David has interceded with God on behalf of the child,40 even though he has already heard from Nathan that 'the child born unto you will surely die' (v. 14), he begins his fast and his mourning for the child. The explanation for this is given by him to his servants (vv. 2223): David fasts because there is good reason to do so when importuning the heavens for mercy, and there is no reason to fast when fasting is a sign only of mourning. David's fast is emphasized by an internal object, 'and David fasted (a 40. Rabbi David Kimchi. Perhaps this is a general statement, a type of general followed by a particular. A kind of introduction. Cf. Fokkelman 1981: 88. Attention should be given to the fact that only here is he referred to as 'a boy and in the rest of the passage he is called 'a child , including the words of David himself (21), while 11.27 reads 'and bore him a son , Nathan (v. 14) calls him 'the son . Cf. Gen. 21.1-21, where Ishmael is called by a number of different names: 'son , 'boy , 'youth , 'the son of the maidservant . As far as Nathan is concerned, the child is his son. To David, he is a child (as Ishmael was born to Hagar). He is termed here 'a youth as in Exod. 2.6: 'she saw the child: and behold a weeping boy

112

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

fast)',41 as well as by the words 'neither would he eat bread'. And it would seem that this serves to indicate to us how profound his sorrow was, because in addition to depriving himself of food and drink he prostrated himself on the ground.42 This shows us the depth of his sorrow, and we encounter it in another story about David (2 Sam. 13.31). David attempts to atone for his deeds by fasting and mourning, and thus to repent. His repentance echoes the sin. According to the proverb of the poor man's lamb: 'It did eat of his own bread, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom' (12.3).43 So, too, with David's repentance: he did not eat, he did not drink and he lay on the ground (v. 16) (Carlson 1964: 189). His profound heartbreak is stressed by the fact that the elders of his house44 attempt to raise him from the ground, but David refuses. He sees prostrating himself as a symbol of both transgression and atonement. He refuses to eat: 'but he would not, neither would he eat bread'. The author uses a verb here that is rarely encountered in Scripture:45 With the exception of Lamentations the only biblical books containing this verb concern either David or his son. The verb appears in the text under discussion within a context of eating, which is designed to strengthen and to sustain man immersed in deep sorrow. In the parallel element of the pivot pattern (v. 20) we find a description of David's revitalization and the termination of his mourning. In contrast to the lack of action up to now, here he becomes extremely active. There is a sequence of three verbs, 'and washed, and annointed himself, and changed his apparel', which testify to this (cf. Gen. 25.34, Ruth 3.3). This surprises his servants just as his words which follow (vv. 22-23) astound them. There is a clear parallel between the actions: 41. Cf. 'let us make bricks' (Gen. 11.3), and Gen. 27.34, etc. 42. LXX translates instead of this: 'he wore sack cloth'. The words 'he lay down' are omitted in LXX VV. Tur-Sinai (1965) suggests 'and David fasted and wept'. Attention should be given that throughout this passage David is referred to as David, and not the king, as an admission that he has diminished the extent of kingship which he possessed and has become one of the people in this his period of mourning. 43. Cf. 11.11: 'and shall I come home to eat and to drink and to lie with my wife'. In v. 13: 'he did eat and drink ... to lie'. 44. The chief servants who conducted the affairs of his household, as the elders of his house (Gen. 24.2). 45. 2 Sam. 3.35; 12.17; 13.5, 6, 10; Lam. 4.10.

3. Action and Outcome

113

And David fasted neither would he eat bread- and asked them to set46 bread before him, and he lay upon the ground - and he rose from the ground and washed47 Then David changed his apparel. and went in and lay - then he came to his own house And the elders of his house arose and went - Then David arose to him to raise him up

At first it is the elders of the house who implore him to eat, but he demurs. At the conclusion, however, he is the one who asks for food and his servants respond to his request. David presents a picture of sober tragedy occasioned by a strange mourning ritual explained by David to his servants (and possibly because this is so the description is extended. Note v. 20). The paradox which is latent in David's behaviour in this time of sorrow48 is expressed in expository literary devices adopted in order to present it. The servants' whisperings (at the climax of the pattern—v. 18) prepare us for the king's sudden burst of energy. In place of this we hear the brief confirmation ('he is dead from the servants. Because the worst scenario has been realized he rises to his feet and performs a series of hasty actions that include the twice repeated word 'come', which are conveyed by a series of verbs,49 and all this in front of his servants, ending with the simple and naive words, which he says to his astonished servants (v. 23). Human beings generally mourn loss of life: in David's case the expression of sorrow and the fasting are all manifestations of a desire to arouse divine mercy (Alter 1988: 148). And it came to pass on the seventh day that the child died (v. 18)—In the second element of the structure we find an introduction which indicates both a change and a development in the events with the passage 46. Cf. 'Set on bread' (Gen. 43.31). 47. Possibly there exists a connection between 'and he bathed' and 11.2, 8: 'the woman bathed', 'and bathe your feet'. 48. Many researchers have expressed different descriptions of the nature of the mourning and its timing: there are those who are of the opinion that David followed a practice different from that which was accepted (Hertzberg 1964; Wiirthwein 1974). Gerleman (1973) maintains that David manifests profound reverence in order to hide the true reason for the child's illness. Pederson (1940) is of the opinion that David's mourning was a reversion to an ancient form of ritual mourning. 49. Nine (!) as against four verbs in v. 16.

114

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

of time. There is here a bridging of a short space of time in parallel to the expressions 'and it came to pass after a long time' (Josh. 23.1; Judg. 11.4), 'and it came to pass after this' (2 Sam. 13.1), 'And it came to pass after these things' (Gen. 39.7), which represent the passing of a longer period of time. The change comes on the seventh day50 after six days of 'routine' action.51 There is a deterioration in the condition of the child, that is expressed as a fact by the narrator. In the parallel element 'the death of the child', expressed in direct speech by the servants, we encounter an extremely brief dialogue, which in the original Hebrew is three words in length, and is the only one in the episode under discussion. As a result of the behaviour of the servants, and particularly their whispered comments, David suspects that something has taken place and he asks them with extreme brevity and without embellishment: 'Is the child dead?'52 Their reply too is extremely brief: 'He is dead'! The narrator has chosen to reveal the knowledge of the child's death gradually, in direct speech, after first divulging the thoughts of the servants (v. 18): Initially in the narrator's language:

and it came to pass on the seventh day

that the child died.

and then in reported speech:

And the servants of David feared to tell him

that the child was dead.

And after this occurs an internal monologue occurs couched as an internal quotation: 'they said, behold while the child was yet alive, and how then shall we tell him that the child is dead'. David understands,53 having evidenced the whisperings as an internal monologue (v. 19), that 'the child was dead'. After the two internal monologues, the servants' and David's, we encounter the only brief dialogue in the pericope, that between David and his servants. 50. On the seventh day after the birth of the child (Abarbanel) or of David's fast? Carlson (1964) makes mention of the relationship between the seventh day and the son of Bathsheba (p. 154). 51. This literary phenomenon is known from Akkadian and Ugaritic literature. In the narrative of King Kereth III 14.1 KTU lines 2-3, the following is written: 'go the first day and the second, third and fourth day, fifth and sixth day. And at sunrise on the seventh—you will arrive in Udum.' Cf. Loewenstamm 1962: 227-35. 52. Cf. 'is the young man Absalom safe' (2 Sam. 18.29, 32). 53. Sternberg (1979: 115, 119) sees in the word 'understands' 'a summarized insertion'.

3. Action and Outcome

115

In the third element, we find the revealing of David's servants' innermost feelings by the omniscient narrator himself in the wake of the death of the child, mentioned in the second element. His servants are afraid to tell him of the death of the child but David questions them about it. This reluctance is paralleled to a certain extent by the reluctance of the bearers (Ahima'az and the Cushite) of the tidings regarding Absalom's death, who, having been sent, experience great difficulty in expressing their message and stammer, and David has to elicit the information from them (2 Sam. 18.29, 32). In the parallel element we find the same expression 'that the child died', which constitutes a subordinate clause, and not the main clause. In the first instance it is an accusative noun clause where the subject is the servants of David. In the second instance it is an accusative noun clause where the subject is David.54 The narrator places 'feared opposite 'saw , albeit with a different connotation, but he prudently uses roots which create a similar sound in order to form a parallel between the elements.55 David grasps the significance of the whispering of the servants. The connection between what he witnesses and what he comprehends is abundantly clear. The transition from objective action to its subjective reporting in an accusative noun clause is no longer a topic for conjecture but is a factual given. There exists an observational synchronization as in: 'and she left off bearing ... and Leah saw that she had left off bearing' (Gen. 29.35; 30.9) (Sternberg 1982: 107). Apparently, this prolix style containing two objective sentences (in the fifth element) serves to decrease the tempo of the events: the awareness that the child has died gradually penetrates David's consciousness aided by the servants whispering. for they said, Behold while the child was yet alive we spoke to him and he would not hearken to our voice: how then shall we tell him that the child is dead and he will do himself a mischief '(v. 18). The climax of the pivot pattern is situated in the second half of v. 18. An explanation of the servants' reverance which causes their reluctance to pass the information regarding the child's death on to David is given by means 54. There is a chiastic relationship between 'the servants of David'

55. Cf. 'and when all the kings saw (2 Sam. 10.19).

and 'David his servants' ... so Aram feared

(v. 18) (v. 19). to help ...'

116

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

of a 'flashback' ('we spoke to him, and he would not hearken to our voice'). By means of this device the profound sorrow experienced by David is emphasized, and this is the subject of the pericope. The omniscient narrator chooses to convey these things for the purposes of emphasis56 through the medium of the servants in an internal monologue, couched in direct speech, by penetrating the psyche of the servants, just as he penetrates David's ('and David understood') (cf. Bowman 1985: 51). The climax is expressed by way of a comparative sentence, a minor ad mains,51 that adds emphasis to the sentence's content. The contrast between living—dying, as we encounter it in the remarks of the servants, finds expression in the sentence 'after he arose' (v. 21), as well as in the reply by David (vv. 22, 23). The relationship between living—dying appears here in a chiastic pattern: for the purpose of emphasis.

This chiasmus appears within another chiasmus:

58.

The servants fear that perhaps David will inflict injury upon himself ('and he will do himself a mischief, v. 18) was unnecessary, in that he behaves in a completely rational way, according to his reading of the situation. His deep sorrow is an expression of a request for pardon for what he has done as well as a hope that God will be gracious 'and that the child will live' (v. 22). He is suspended between despair and hope, between 56. It is clear that as the penetration of the soul gets closer to the form of a direct quotation, the form of an internal monologue, so it tends to draw nearer to a full representation of the life of the soul, the linguistic and experiential uniqueness. The direct quotation allows for a detailed representation because of the formal absence of the one quoting from the body of the quotation (Steinberg 1979: 114). 57. This style which involves a minor ad maius, ' recurs in the following sections of the biblical text in seven sentences: Gen. 26.9, 44.8; Exod. 6.12, 30; 2 Kgs 10.4; Isa. 20.6. 58. Fokkelman 1986: 90. LXX LV adds to 'we said to him'—'to rise from the earth'. This is unnecessary.

3. Action and Outcome

117

apprehension that the child will die and the expectation that the child will live. At the climax of the structure this contrast between despair and hope (life—death) finds its expression, not uttered by David (as in v. 22) but stated by the servants. They express their fear at conveying the bitter message to their king, who appears to be smitten by sin and who behaves as a mourner, before he knows of the death of his son, at a time when he still holds out hope that the child will live. In this particular structure the word live appears once, and that at the climax, whereas the word dies appears, excluding a parallel to the word lives, at the pivot of the pattern, an additional five times in this episode. I can infer the sorrow and the signs of mourning manifested by David as a result of the child's illness and his apprehension before its death from the servants' remarks. The narrator extends the description of David's sadness (as well as in the dialogue which follows vv. 22-23) in order to stress his contrition. It becomes clear that even the rigorous self denial which David imposes upon himself, the fasting and the vigorous attempts to evoke divine amnesty which will nullify the decree, despite its decisiveness that the Lord will cause Bathsheba's child to die, are not a guarantee that the verdict will be anulled. This is as a result of the fact that even the sinner who repents of his deeds is deserving of punishment according to the letter of the law, and the wiping away of his trespass comes within the framework not of justice but of loving-kindness (cf. Simon 1992: 72). The extent of David's pain is expressed by his servants, and in this way the impression of sorrow is increased. David's behaviour after receiving the news of the death of his son (20) only intensifies the degree of his pain and sorrow expressed through his actions. 6. The Robbing of the Holy Artifacts by Members of the Tribe of Dan (Judges 18.16-17) A

And the six hundred men girded with their weapons of war, (v. 16) who were of the tribe of Dan, stood by the entrance of the gate X And the five men that went to spy out the land went up, (v. 17) and came in there and took the carved idol and the breastplate, and the icons, and the molten image B' and the priest stood by the entrance of the gate A1 and the six hundred men girded with the weapons of war. B

This pivot pattern comprises two verses dealing with the purloining of the idol and the other holy items, by the men of the tribe of Dan.

118

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

These verses are situated between the description of the arrival of the warriors at the house of the young man including the inquiry regarding the health of the Levite (v. 15) and an additional description: 'and these came unto the house of Micah', that includes the question asked by the priest, 'What are you doing'? (v. 18). Many researchers regard these verses as being clumsy. The Malbim's question is particularly apposite: Why is there this duplication, 'and they came to the house of the youth' 'and five men came up' etc., 'and they came to the house of Micah' and the repetition 'and took the carved idol' in v. 20 'and took the breastplate' all this seems to be expendable and the word order is not correct, to all who read it.

There are those who think that these two verses, 16 and 17, are a late, confused gloss, and that the continuation of v. 15 is v. 18 (Burney 1970a). There are those who view certain of the verses as additions resulting from errors in transcribing,59 but to me it appears that the pivot structure is not created by later additions of a section nor by the addition of phrases resulting from error and chance occurences. In addition I shall attempt to place this version in correct perspective and to compare it to other versions. And the six hundred men60 girded with their weapons of war—These six hundred are already mentioned in v. 11, as the warriors who went out to conquer La'ish. They are not termed warriors here, nor are they given any similar appellation, but simply men, with the addition of 'girded with their weapons of war' or 'weapons of war' (vv. 11, 18). In the final hemistich of the pericope as well, that which is parallel in the structure to the first hemistich, this expression is found with minute changes as mentioned). But there is a syntactical difference. In the first element there is a subject with attributives ('girded with weapons of war'), when the predicate ('stood') occurs in the second element. In the last hemistich are a subject and an attributive phrase, but no predicate (possibly because the predicate—verb—'they came'—is situated in v. 18) (Moore 1958). Consequently there are those who delete the final element in the pericope based on the reading of LXX, and on the assumption that there is 59. Ehrlich (1900) who refers to the Hexapla. See below. 60. There are those who read this with the addition of the definite article basing it on v. 17, including Kittel (1937).

3. Action and Outcome

119

an error made by the scribe who simply transcribed the first element in the pericope again (Ehrlich 1900). But it would seem that this is not acceptable and that the repetition of the phrase serves to indicate events occurring simultaneously, a phenomenon encountered in other places in Scripture,61 that is: at the moment that the spies took the holy vessels, the 600 men stood at the opening of the gates in order, according to Abarbanel, 'to see whether there was none that opened the mouth or chirped'. In the second line there is a sentence which seems at first sight to be slightly confused: 'who were of the tribe of Dan, stood by the entrance of the gate' (the translation includes the amendment, referred to below, to the original Hebrew text). Six hundred men stood by the entrance of the gate apparently, next to the house of Micah (thus Kaufmann 1962) and not by the entrance of the gate of the city.62 They waited to see what would happen or possibly they intended to protect those who went up to Micah's house. The expression 'who were of the children of Dan' is apparently not in place here and should therefore be removed to after the words 'and six hundred men' ('who were of the children of Dan').63 So also the connection between the following line 'stood by the entrance of the gate' becomes closer to the parallel line in the structure which states that: 'and the priest stood by the entrance of the gate'. The priest stood opposite the 600 men (in the second line) and apparently here as well. It indicates that both events happened simultaneously (Kaufmann 1962). At the time that the 5 men went up to the house of Micah, the priest stood at the entrance of the gate and conversed with the men: after the five spies had gone up to wish them well, and when they told him of the men at the entrance of the gate, the young man came to the entrance of the gate immediately to see the men of war passing by and sitting at the gate, and while the priest still stood at the entrance of the gate the men stole all the articles which are mentioned, from the house.64 61. Cf. Talmon 1978: 19-21. See 2 Sam. 13.34, 37. Cf. Long 1984: 385-87. 62. Because they had already come to the house of Micah (v. 15). And possibly it was influenced by the phrase having this meaning in 2 Sam. 10.8; 1 Kgs 22.10; 2 Kgs 7.3; etc. 63. In the Peshitta following the version of the Hexapla, the phrase 'who were from the children of Dan' occurs after 'their war', and this alteration seems less than the previous one. Moore (1958) believes that this phrase is a gloss which emphasizes that they were the defenders of the place. 64. Thus Abarbanel and Malbim in their commentaries. Moore (1958) is of the

120

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

The narrator creates a parallel between the priest and the 600 men by the use of similar language, 'stood by the entrance of the gate', in order to demonstrate the irony in the situation. He goes out to greet them, as an act of friendship to his guests, and he does not realize what his guests are plotting against him, and they wait for their bretheren, who are stealing the holy vessels, in order to prevent any interference in this act of plundering. The only sentence in the structure (and the longest one in it) that indicates dynamic action, is situated in the centre of the pivot pattern (as in the first and the last two lines of the pattern we find only the description of a situation, static and without action): And the five men that went to spy out the land went up, and came in there and took the carved idol and the breast-plate and the icons and the molten image. I find three verbs here which indicate movement and action, followed by four direct objects, the holy artifacts. After they had gone out with the priest to the detachment, the men left him there amongst the soldiers, and they sneaked away from there and went up to 'Beth Ha'Elohim' (Kaufmann 1962). They came ... they took . These verbs (in this form) 65 constitute a trap. In LXX we find 'and they came '. Budde (1897) suggested that 'they came and they took should be read as the imperative form, but this does not seem correct. Bertheau (1883) maintains that the verbs 'they came... they tookappear in this form in order to indicate simultaneity: these actions took place at the same time, when the priest 'stood at the entrance of the gate'. In order to emphasize that 600 men stood there, precisely at the time that they stole the carved idol, the narrator uses this form of the verb. But if it would have been so, then the version would have been somewhat different. Possibly, there are verbs here without the conjunctive and with the following meaning: and they returned to the house of God to take the carved idol.66 At the climax of the pattern is the theft67 of the holy artifacts: and opinion that v. 17 is a gloss because of the repetition. 65. See the structure of a sentence as follows: 'and they went up ... they came and they took' as in 'and Gideon came and made ready ... and put it in a basket' (Judg. 6.19) as well as in Judg. 2.17. 66. Kaufmann 1962. See Judg. 20.31,43; Jer. 14.3 ('they come to the pits'). 67. Cf. 'Now Rachel had taken the images' (Gen. 31.34). 'Yet, why hast thou

3. Action and Outcome

121

took the carved idol and the breast plate and the icons and the molten image. The taking of the holy artifacts was the aim of the people of Dan, together with some 'persuading' of the priest to come with them, in order to set up the carved idol in their new place, and the priest would serve them. These holy articles were mentioned in the story of Micah, when his mother gave silver to a smith, and he created 'a carved idol and a molten image' (Judg. 17.4), and Micah made for their house of God 'a breastplate and icons' (17.5). The carved idol is the most important of the holy articles, and is therefore mentioned first (17, 18), just as its setting up is mentioned (18.30-31) without making mention of any other ritual articles.681 therefore have a pivot pattern before us, which has the principal deed, the theft of the religious articles, at its climax, which the children of Dan will worship in their new place. The structure of the central sentence is based on the use of verbs in the pa'al form. This proves, perhaps, that the actions were simultaneous, which is expressed by the repetition which links the first lines with the last (A-B—C-D). The pivot pattern, which has the plunder of the vessels69 at its climax, stresses the violent involvement of the children of Dan as well as their ingratitude, after the priest has received them and gone out to meet them, and prior to which he had conveyed the word of God to them (18.6). The priest and the 600 men stand one against the other (both literally stolen my gods?' (31.30); 'For Jacob knew not that Rachel had stolen them' (31.33). This is also a reference to the theft of images. Cf. the story of Aeneas, who stole the idols of the house (according to Plutarch, Cam. 2.6). As well as in Judg. 17.2 'The silver which was taken from you ... I took it'. 68. Although in v. 14 the order is different. Note should be taken that these holy vessels have a negative connotation: idol (Exod. 20.4, Isa. 44.15); a graven image (Exod. 34.17, Lev. 19.4). Breastplate (on its own) appears in most instances with a positive meaning (1 Sam. 2.28, 14.3). 'Images' on its own appears with a negative meaning (Gen. 31.19, Ezra 21.26). When annexed to the words 'idol' and 'graven image' its meaning becomes negative (cf. Amit 1991: 270). It would appear that associating 'breast plate ' with 'images adjacent to 'idol and 'graven image indicates that in later ritual there was a tendency to dissociate from it (see also Hos. 3.4). Cf. Amit 1992b: 91. 69. Or preparations for plundering. This possibility features in a number of commentaries. It seems to me, however, that in v. 18, 'and they came ... and they took ...', constitutes an adverbial clause of time, 'when they came and took'.

122

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

and metaphorically)—but each of them have decidedly different aims. In the external framework of the structure the narrator emphasizes twice (contrary to the opinion that what is written the second time is a transcriber's error) that 600 men are standing armed 'girded with their weapons of war', and this serves as an allusion to their violent intent (as well as emphasizing this) towards the young Levite and the reason for his fear of them and the theft of his holy objects, which is mentioned at the climax of the pattern. Apparently, both in these things, and in the story as a whole, there is an overt antagonism towards the children of Dan and their temple, a hostile and mocking tradition, passed on in Judah, about the house of ritual in Dan which is based on theft and seduction (cf. Amit 1992a). 7. David in the Wilderness ofZiph (1 Samuel 23.14-15)10 A

And David dwelt in the wilderness in fastnesses, and dwelt in a mountain in the wilderness of Ziph. B And Saul sought him every day X but God delivered him not into his hand. B' And David saw that Saul came out to seek his death; A' And David was in the wilderness of Ziph at Horesh

(v. 14)

(v. 15)

In the verses above the narrator describes David's dwelling in the Ziph region because of Saul's harassment of him (which is unrelenting) and God's protection of him. Previously he wandered from place to place, as it is stated: 'and went wherever they could go' (v. 13), and therefore Saul stopped going out after him. And it was only afterwards, when David remained in the fastnesses, in the wilderness of Ziph, that Saul sought him. Because of the repetition of the words in the two verses, there are those reseachers who are of the opinion that part of these verses is not original. Caird71 perceives vv. 15-18 as an editorial addendum. Flanagan (1971) maintains that v. 14 was a supplement by an editor, in which details relating to the wilderness of Ziph were inserted, in order to connect it with the verses of the following section. He saw in vv. 15-18 an episode, whose central context is Horesh. Segal (1964) divides it as follows: v. 14—David in the wilderness; vv. 1518—the covenant between David and Jonathan. A similar opinion is expressed by Keil and Delitzsch (1967). Fokkelman (1986: 435) sees 70. Cf. Fokkelman 1986: 436. 71. Caird 1953: see in 14b editorial abstract.

3. Action and Outcome

123

vv. 14-18 as an episode whose subject is David in Horesh, where Jonathan visits him. It appears to me, however, that these suggestions of editorial addenda and division between v. 14 and v. 15 are unacceptable. It would appear that the pivot pattern proves that there is a close connection formed between the two verses under review:72 their time span is different from that of the verses both before and after them, and it is completely impossible to separate them, whether they are connected to the previous verses by descriptions of the sites of the escape, or in the following verses in the location of Horesh. Apparently the author, who identifies with David, dwelling for a time in one place in order to escape from Saul's persecutions, retards the tempo of the event ('and he dwelt ' as opposed to 'and he rose up ', 'and they went out -13), and he describes this sojourn in an introduction (which follows) which indicates continuity ('and he dwelt... and he dwelt... and he sought him every day'), a type of intermediate section between the other events, which follow one upon the other. Despite the fact that many of the verbs appear here in the form (and the speed of the action, characteristic of these forms, is not considered in this episode), the author summarizes a complete period in the life of David very briefly from a point of view, later in time, like somebody observing the action from a distance in time (Fokkelman 1986: 435). It is precisely as a result of this that these verses constitute an episode. The author wants to emphasize the extended period, in which David was in the position of being pursued by Saul, 'but God delivered him not into his hand' (14), and he therefore constructs the episode in a pivot pattern. And David dwelt in the wilderness in fastnesses and dwelt in a mountain in the wilderness of Ziph (v. 14)—David's dwelling came after he escaped from Keilah (v. 13). Prior to this it is stated 'and David arose with his men ... and went wherever they could go' (v. 13). There is a clear connection between the verbs: 'dwell—go', 'go out', 'escape'. This 'dwelling' in our text indicates dwelling after pursuit, Saul's pursuit of David, and this we find in other places in Scripture.73 The verbs which appear prior to his dwelling are characteristic of the 72. Barrera (1979: 203) sees in these two verses a pattern of the description of flight and pursuit. 73. Exod. 2.14-15; Judg. 9.21, 11.3, 10; 1 Sam. 23.14, 25, 27.1-5; 1 Kgs 11.40, 12.2; Jer. 26.21 (without the verb 'dwelt'). For additional comments on the verb 'dwelt', see Barrera 1979: 201.

124

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

description of escape, of flight. These places are mentioned, of course, to indicate the location of his dwelling, places which are inaccessible on foot, sometimes in fastnesses and sometimes in the mountain (if the intention is not to indicate a particular place). This also explains 'and Saul sought him' but in fact did not find him, because on each occasion that he came to a particular place David was not there.74 The author expresses this in the form of a chiastic parallelism: And David dwelt in the wilderness in strongholds

and he

dwelt in a mountain in the wilderness of Ziph

He does this in order to distinguish between the wilderness, in general, and after it the fastnesses in the mountain, in particular. The places which are mentioned here comprise a type of regional framework for the continuity of the text 14b and 15a, and therefore the verb 'and he dwelt' signifies the beginning of a new mise-en-scene, with a different time frame (Fokkelman 1986: 436). In the final hemistich, which is parallel to the first in this structure, it is stated that David is in Horesh in the wilderness of Ziph. He does not leave the location, even though he would have known that Saul would come looking for him. It would appear from the repetition that there is a summary here of all that befell David in his wanderings.75 The name 76 of an additional place appears, a wood the last word in the structure, in the episode, that transports us (vv. 16-18) to the meeting place between Jonathan and David. It would seem, that the link between these two hemistichoi becomes closer as a result of the chiastic connection between them: and David dwelt in a mountain in the wilderness of Ziph (14)

And David was in the wilderness of Ziph, in a Horesh (15)

74. Abarbanel as well as Malbim and Segal (1964). 75. Segal 1964. Fokkelman 1986: 435. Possibly to indicate simultaneity, as in Judg. 18.16-17. 76. Possibly Horesh is read thus, because of the addition of the he locale. Cf. 'And David went to Horesh (16). The additional he because the accent is penultimate (Radak).

3. Action and Outcome

125

The preceding sentence is a nominal sentence in so far as the verb 'and he dwelt' is omitted, and this we have encountered in parallel texts in Scripture. In these texts we find a pattern which is not constant.77 From this pattern I infer that the verb 'and he dwelt is required here because it appears in virtually all the other verses which contain the pattern. Possibly the author delayed introducing this verb until the end of the section, 'and David dwelt in Horesh' (v. 18) after the conversation between David and Jonathan there.78 But it is preferable to assume that the verb here is 'fell out'. This reconstruction serves to tighten the structure of the pivot pattern. 77. This pattern in its entirety is expressed as follows: And A heard these words and A sought to kill B andB feared and fled from before A and B dwelt... The model is not constant and has periodic changes or deletions. It would appear, however, that the model occurs in its entirety in Exod. 2.14-15: And Moses feared and Pharaoh heard this thing and he sought to kill Moses and Moses fled from before Pharaoh and he dwelt in the land of Midian and he sat by a well And in this section of the text the model occurs as follows: And David dwelt and he remained in a mountain and Saul sought to kill him and David saw that Saul came out to seek him and David was in the Wilderness of Ziph in Horesh And in v. 25 of this version of the text: Then Saul

went out with his men to seek him And they told David: so that he came down into a rock And dwelt in the Wilderness of Maon

See Barrera 1979: 202-203. 78. Possibly the model appears here as in 2 Sam. 13.37-38 without the word 'dwelt'. See Fokkelman 1986: 438.

126

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

In the second line of the structure, after the mention of the regions in which he dwelt, we encounter the reason for this tarrying by David, in an additional component of the pattern: 'And Saul sought him each day.' The narrator emphasizes the many attempts by Saul to find David, which are expressed in the words 'each day'; this constitutes a summation, from the narrator's point of view. In the parallel hemistich we encounter this fact in a somewhat different form, from David's point of view: 'and David saw that Saul went out to seek his death' (v. 15). The above is an outstanding example of the tension between that which is revealed and that which is concealed in the shaping of reality. The same phenomenon presents the value standpoint characteristic of one of the people involved79 initially, objectively and, subsequently, subjectively. The connection between the elements is expressed, besides the common words, by a chiastic parallel:

In the first excerpt, that from the perspective of the narrator, the sentence is presented in the standard scriptural narrative way, the imperfect of the iktol and the waw conversive followed by the subject. From David's point of view, however, Saul appears before his objective, because here Saul is the main factor, the king who threatens. The chiastic connection makes the link between the sentences closer. But certain differences exist: the phrase 'Saul came out' appears in David's consciousness, but does not appear in the first hemistich. Saul does not merely seek him, but he came out to seek, in that the verb 'came out' is the principal component of the extended predicate 'came out to seek' and actually indicates a military action against him. This verb 'came out' is mentioned when Saul interrupts his attempts to capture David: 'he forebore to come out' (v. 13), apparently from the place in which he stayed. A no less meaningful change is expressed in the words 'and Saul sought him'.80 In David's consciousness 'and Saul came out to seek his 79. Sternberg (1982: 119), cf. 1 Sam. 31.6-9, from the point of view of the narrator and the Philistines. 80. Cf. 1 Sam. 26.2: 'And Saul arose to seek David.'

3. Action and Outcome

127

death'. The complete phrase is, of course, the second one, 'to seek his death , which occurs frequently in the prophecy of Jeremiah and in chapters of Psalms. Here the expression reveals David's perception of Saul's pursuit of him: he wanted to kill him.81 David's viewpoint is expressed in the verb which occurs in the main sentence: 'And he saw that...', he recognized and understood,82 that Saul was harassing him. As it is written in a later chapter 'But David abode in the wilderness and he saw that Saul came after him into the wilderness. David therefore sent out spies' (1 Sam. 26.3-4). Despite the frequency of the appearance of this phrase many researchers contend83 'that he feared should be read in place of 'hew ' . Barrera (1979: 203 n. 11) reinforces this opinion with the pattern which appears in Exod. 2.14-15, 'and Moses feared and in Jer. 26.21 Jonathan's remarks to David contribute to reinforcing his assumption, 'Fear not for the hand of Saul my father shall not find thee' (v. 17), that relate directly to the verses under consideration, 'and God did not deliver him into his hand' (vv. 14-15).84 Seemingly, this correction links well with the pivot: God guards over him, but David is not aware of this until Jonathan arrives and encourages him by his remarks (v. 17).85 In the centre of the pivot pattern we encounter the involvement by the divine: but God delivered him no^into his hand—the Lord provides protection for David. In any case, the narrator divulges to the reader that nothing will befall David in his wanderings, because the Lord is there to assist him. Apparently, this is the divine response to Saul, who assumes that after David has arrived in Keilah, a city of gates and bars, that 'God has delivered him into my hand'(23.7). And the human reply to Saul is found in Jonathan's words to David: 'for the hand of my father shall not find thee' (v. 17). Furthermore, there is an apparent use of irony here in the 81. Cf. David's entreaty to Saul: 'And thou huntest my soul to take it' (1 Sam. 24.12). 82. Cf. Rashi on Gen. 18.2. Cf. Judg. 16.18. 83. Ehrlich 1900, Kittel 1951, Driver 1960, Tur-Sinai 1965. 84. Barrera (1979) relies too on 1 Kgs 19.3, where it is written 'saw , but LXX, the Peshitta and the Vulgate read 'feared . The characters change about: first we read that 'Saul continued to be afraid of David' (1 Sam. 18; 29) and now David fears Saul. 85. Contrary to Fokkelman 1986: 437 n. 5. 86. LXX reads 'the Lord'. The change, however, is unnecessary. Cf. this chapter v. 7, Gen. 31.7.

128

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

key word hand,87 which indicates the inability of Saul to capture him. The Philistines will be delivered into David's hand: 'Go down to Keilah: for I will deliver the Philistines into thy hand' (v. 4), but David will not be delivered into Saul's hand. God is the factor which stands like a barrier between David and Saul to provide him with divine protection and to prevent Saul from capturing him. Jacob says to his wives, in language similar to the words used here: 'but God did not allow him to hurt me ' (Gen. 31.7). In this sentence the author goes beyond the mere relating of events and speaks of divine causality which is responsible for everything. The Lord's benefactions appear therefore at the centre of the structure, to teach us about God's protection and strength. It is not within Saul's power to capture David nor is it within David's power to escape from Saul, other than by God's will! 8. The People's Approval of David's Deeds (2 Samuel 3.36) A

And all the people took notice of it, and it pleased them: X

A'

as whatever the king did pleased all the people

Amongst the remarks made by King David after Abner's murder, his vow (v. 35) and his confession before his servants (v. 38), we find the comments of the narrator about the people's acknowledgment and awareness, that 'the slaing of Abner son of Ner did not come from the king' (vv. 36-37). These remarks appear in two verses, with great similarity between them. The first verse (36) is structured as a pivot, in order to stress the recognition by the people of David's deeds. But the author chooses to emphasize his words also by his bearing additional and complementary testimony for the information of the people regarding the heinous deed of Abner's murder, because David feared that possibly the people might suspect him because he wished to eliminate the commander of the army of Israel.88 He is obliged, therefore, to remove any taint of suspicion that might be upon him, quickly, because 87. Frequently in this chapter. Cf. 'delivered into his hand (Miscall 1986: 139). 88. Cf. Lemche (1978: 16-17), VanderKam (1980: 532-33), etc., who are of the opinion that the murder was committed at the behest of David.

3. Action and Outcome

129

in what is described he intends, in all innocence, to make a covenant with Abner.89 The narrator emphasizes, in order to absolve David, that 'David knew it not' (v. 26). David takes rapid action: he curses Joab (vv. 28-29), he orders the burial with honour of Abner (vv. 32-33), he eulogizes him (v. 33) and finally he fasts (v. 35). In the middle of this the narrator emphasizes (vv. 27, 30) that Joab performed this deed to avenge Asa'el, his brother (2.23). Actually these things, vengeance, David's ignorance, allow the narrator to absolve the king of all sin. In the verses above he stresses that the whole nation, all of Israel, knew that the king was not responsible for the deed. And all the people took notice of it, and it pleased them: the expression 'and it [the matter] pleased' appears frequently in Scripture.90 The phrase is stated here apparently because the people recognized the innocence and sincerity of David's actions. They knew, that he was filled with sorrow at Abner's death, and this pleased them, in that there was room for doubt regarding the nature of his deeds and his mourning: as whatever the king did91 apparently his mourning, his following the bier and his lament for Abner. Pleased all the people—The phrase 'pleased' is repeated frequently in the Bible.92 Once again the narrator states, that the nation has accepted David's actions as genuine. They are in accord with the wish of the people. It would seem that the word in the phrase meaning 'pleased', expresses consent here, as it does in 1 Kgs 2.18, Ruth 3.13 (cf. Zakovitch 1990: 85). This verse is close to v. 37. What then is the difference? In this verse the author expresses the recognition by the people as a positive statement 'and whatever he did pleased ...' in general. Whereas in v. 37 the narrator expresses the acknowledgment of the people by way of a negative statement: 'but the slaying of Abner 89. Attention should be given to the iteration of the expression 'and he went in peace' (21-23). 90. Gen. 41.37, after Joseph interprets Pharaoh's dream subsequent to the failure of the magicians to do so. As well as Gen. 45.16; Josh. 22.30, 32; 1 Sam. 18.5; etc. 91. This expression occurs in other places in the Bible, e.g. 'and he shall fight for you according to all this that he did for you in Egypt before your eyes' (Deut. 1.30), as well as Judg. 8.35, 1 Sam. 8.8, etc. 92. E.g. Num. 10.24, Judg. 19.21, etc. This is similar to this episode intentionally: 'And Abner went... and spoke in the ears ... all that seemed good to Israel and to the whole house of Benjamin' (19).

130

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

did not come from the king' in particular. But, apparently, the verb at the beginning of the verses, and its form, distinguish between them better than anything else. And all the people understood —The narrator does not commence with the imperfect form of the verb and the waw conversive as is usual when indicating a normal chronological sequence, 'and the king came... and the king vowed... and the king understood... and the king said' ... (vv. 35, 37, 38), but in the perfect form with the subject at the beginning of the sentence in order to indicate the past perfect,93 that is to say: even before his vow to fast (v. 35), the nation recognized the nature of his deeds. Now he can emphasize once again that as whatever the king did—all his deeds— pleased all the people. In v. 37 he starts in the accepted biblical way, the waw conversive plus a verb in the imperfect tense: 'And all the people knew , after previously having recognized. First they recognized the sincerity of his actions, and now, after he vowed and fasted, they know that the death of Abner ben Ner did not come from the king (v. 37). Attention should be given to the fact that it is stated here 'that they knew on that day', and this is an apparent anachronism, to indicate that the recognition took place prior to this.94 This verb pair appears in other verses in the Scriptures as well: '... nor did he acknowledge his brothers, nor knew his own children' (Deut. 33.9). This also occurs in Isa. 61.9, 63.16; Ruth 3.14. At the beginning of this verse and at its conclusion the whole people is mentioned. At the commencement 'and it pleased them , they acknowledged the integrity of the king and the sincerity of his actions. There is a change of word order at the end of the structure: 'pleased all the people'. The different versions and their translations of the Scriptures placed doubt on this last parallel. The word 'good is omitted in certain of the translations. The Greek translation of the word 93. Cf. 'But he himself turned back after reaching the carved stones' (Judg. 3.19) before he arrived in Moab; 'And Absalom had taken and reared up for himself...' (2 Sam. 18.18) before his death. 94. Malbim explains the doubling of the terms 'they recognized ... they knew' as follows: 'they recognized because for all that there was still room for doubt that David had done the deed with deception in order not to enrage Israel. And they knew—after it was stated that he had done every thing honestly, and this was an indication that it was a sincere and just act and therefore they did not react against him.'

3. Action and Outcome

131

is found only in two versions of LXX. In the others it is missing. The word is left out too in 4QSama (see Ulrich 1979: 97). The LXX, the Peshitta and the Vulgate read as follows in their respective translations: 'And all that the king did in the eyes of all the people pleased them'. Many researchers accept this reading (e.g. Ulrich 1979 and McCarter 1980). If this reading is accepted then the phrase 'in the eyes of all the people' is superfluous (Segal 1964). It would seem to me that these versions and 4QSama are unacceptable. Apparently, either the translator or the transcriber saw the words 'and it was good' and therefore omitted the word 'good'. The chiastic structure also reinforces the connection between the sentences (cf. Job 4.17 as against 9.2): And it found favour in their eyes—and it was good in the eyes of

As in other Scripture, so here, the chiasmus is not merely a stylistic embellishment but demands full partnership with its context in the formation of meaning. The author creates a framework, which enfolds the positive action of David (at the centre) and the opinion of the people regarding it. He begins with the verb 'and it found favour' and concludes by emphasizing that the deed was 'good' in the eyes of all the people. Apparently as part of the developement of the version, side by side with the MT an additional text existed, in which the word 'good' was deleted as a result of an error by the transcriber, apparently in that it seemed redundant to the translator because of the phrase 'and it found favour', and he arrived at the Qumran version and the ancient translations. At the centre of the pivot pattern we find the words: as all that the king did (note the repetition: 'and all the people—and all that—all the people'). It becomes clear that the fear of 'what the people would say' about the act of murder spurred David to these decisive and swift actions, in order to remove any suspicion that he might have been involved in the slaying of Abner. And his actions were successful. He was once again master of the situation. The people acknowledged the integrity of his deeds. His fast, his weeping and his lament, all constituted evidence in the eyes of all and proved that the king was innocent, and therefore 'as whatever the king did' is in the centre of the structure, because his outstanding deeds have prevented him and his kingdom from being undermined. But the climax, apparently, is at the extremeties and not at the centre, because it concerns the positive acknowledgment by the people of the king's actions.

132

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets 9. The Nature of King Solomon's Rule (1 Kings 4.20-5.5)

A .Tudah and Israel were many, as the sand which is by the sea for multitude, they ate, and drank, and were happy (v. 20) B And Solomon reigned over all kingdoms from the river (v. 1) to the land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt they brought presents and served Solomon all the days of his life X And Solomon's provision for one day was thirty kor of fine flour, (v. 2) and sixty kor of meal, ten fat oxen, and twenty oxen out of (v. 3) the pasture, and a hundred sheep, apart from deer, and gazelles, and fallow deer and geese. B1 For he ruled over all the region on this side of the river, (v. 4) from Tiphsah to Gaza over all the kings on this side of the river and he had peace on all sides round about him. A' And .Tudah and Israel dwelt in safety, every man under his vine (v. 5) and under his fig tree from Dan to Beer-sheba all the days of Solomon—

This pivot pattern (cf. Long 1984: 73, 75) consists of the author's remarks regarding the nature of Solomon's rule over Judah and Israel and over neighbouring peoples, as well as a description of his wealth, which is expressed by way of a list of 'Solomon's provision for one day' (2).95 This description together with that of Solomon's wisdom (vv. 9-11) serve as a prelude to the building of the temple. The pattern under consideration contains six verses, although there are those who include vv. 6-8 (Porter 1976: 100) or v. 6 in this episode,96 and these assumptions are to be taken seriously, in that we are dealing with the wealth of Solomon's kingdom. But the governors of the provinces are mentioned here in the parallelism of vv. 7-19, and this episode (4.20-5.5) is amongst them. It also does not seem acceptable to change the location of vv. 2-3 and to place them after v. 7 because vv. 4-5 are a direct continuation of v. 1. Apparently the commencement is parallel to the conclusion in this episode and the additional parallelism proves that this is a pivot pattern. The opening of the pattern consists of a sentence describing a situation: Judah and Israel were many, as the sand which is by the sea for multitude, they ate, and drank, and were happy (4.20). 95. LXX divides the chapters differently. It is clear that even the MT division is deficient and the pivot pattern testifies to that. 96. Long (1984: 75), separates the providing of stores by the officers (5.7) and links it with 4.7.

3. Action and Outcome

133

This order—Judah and Israel—is also found in the parallel hemistich (5.5) in the structure, and it reflects a clear Judaean point of view. The natural increase of the people is interpreted as a sign of benison. A king in whose time God provides great bounty to man and to the land is a positive augury to himself and to his nation (cf. Ps. 72). The idioms which are used to describe this fruitfulness and increase are somewhat overstated, so we encounter the following in the text, 'as the sand which is by the sea', which is a scriptural hyperbole.97 The people's wealth and their positive situation are described, employing the verbs 'they eat and they drink and they are happy', all of them found extensively in Scripture to indicate abundance,98 'because they did not fear an enemy' (Radak). In the parallel hemistich we encounter: and Judah and Israel dwelt in safety, every man under his vine and under his Jig tree from Dan to Beer-sheba, all the days of Solomon (5.5). The expression 'from Dan to Beer-sheba' is parallel to the image in v. 20 ('as the sand which is by the sea for multitude'), in that the two phrases complement one another: the entire land from border to border99—the increase of the people. It is not surprising therefore that they are linked to Hushai's advice to Absalom (2 Sam. 17.11). Solomon's reign is described as being perfect, which expresses itself in the wellbeing of the individual also, which is demonstrated in the phrase and Judah and Israel dwelt in safety, every man under his vine and under his fig tree (5.5), which describes the happiness of the man, who is privileged to work his land and to enjoy its bountiful fruit and to find respite from his toil in the shade of those very trees which bear their produce in the courtyard of his home.100 And 'they dwelt in safety' appears in the promises in the Torah: Lev. 25.18-19, 26.5; Deut. 12.10. The conclusion of the pattern emphasizes that the profusion and the joy continue 'all the days of Solomon'.101 97. Gen. 22.17,41.49; 2 Sam. 17.11; Isa. 10.22; Hos. 2.1; etc. 98. Cf. Deut. 12.7; 1 Sam. 30.16; 1 Kgs 1.25; Job 1.13, 18. 99. 'From Dan to Beer-Sheba' indicates the entire land of Israel, and not only that area between these two cities. The Children of Israel dwelt both south of BeerSheba and north of Dan. 100. Cf. the expression in 2 Kgs 18.30; Mic. 4.5; Zech. 3.10. 101. LXX adds: 'and in all the days of Solomon's reign he had no adversaries.' It is obvious that this phrase contains exaggeration because in his old age both the Aramites and the Edomites had begun to trouble his kingdom (1 Kgs 11.25). See v. 1. Cf. with the Lord's promise to David as spoken by David to Solomon (1 Chron. 22.9).

134

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

While in the hemistichoi at the extremeties of the pattern we encounter the wealth (internal) of Judah and Israel, in the second hemistich and its parallel (5.1, 4) there is a description of Solomon's dominion over the peoples in the surrounding areas. These verses, too, contain nominal sentences (cf. Long 1984: 75) (which if they contain a verb—it is participial), which create the impression of a perpetual present (durative verbs): this was the situation 'all the days of his life' (5.1), that is, Solomon's. The opening of these hemistichoi are parallel: for Solomon for he

ruled (1) ruled (4)

These two verbs indicate absolute dominion, without bounds, and appear in parallel hemistichoi in a description of the reign of the king of Babylon (Assyria?) in Isa. 14.5-6: The Lord has broken the staff of the wicked, the sceptre of the rulers that smote the people in wrath with a continual stroke, that ruled the nations in anger.

This parallelism appears in 1 Kgs 4.20-5.5 in two parallel hemistichoi in the structure. Also in the description of the borders of the dominions of his kingdom, we encounter parallels between the hemistichoi. over all kingdoms from the river to the land of the Philistines102 and to the border of Egypt over all the region on this side of the river, from Tiphsah to Gaza 103 over all the kings on this side of the river

This parallel commences with 'all the kingdoms' and concludes with 'the kings on this side of the river' who apparently remained where they were and raised a tribute for Solomon (cf. Long 1984). The expression 'this side of the river' refers to the countries west of the Euphrates,104 and actually represents the ideal borders of Israel as they are stated in the Lord's promise to Abraham (Gen. 15.18) in the 102. Cf. 2 Chron. 9.26: 'from the great river even unto the land of the Philistines'. The remainder of the verses in this passage have no parallel in Chronicles. 103. These words are omitted in LXX. Burney (1970b) is of the opinion that this is an expansion. 104. Cf. Josh. 24.14, 32; 2 Sam. 10.16; Neh. 2.7; etc.

3. Action and Outcome

135

covenant between the pieces as well as in Exod. 23.31; Deut. 1.7; and so on. It would seem that in the contents in 1 Kgs 5.1, there is a description of the realization of the promise that was given to Solomon by the Lord (3.13: 'both riches and honour'). The narrator emphasizes that Solomon's era was distinguished by permanent and stable peace (5.4) by security and by tranquillity. And it would seem that this is acknowledged by the word 'peace which is linked by a Midrashic name derivation on the name Solomon (as in 5.26), which is interwoven with all his activities, and which is given even clearer expression in 1 Chron. 22.9: 'for his name shall be Solomon, and I will give peace and quietness to Israel in his days' (cf. Garsiel 1987: 171). At the centre of the pattern (vv. 2-3) the narrator describes 'Solomon's provision for one day' and then proceeds to give details. Every large meal of meat and wine is known as 'provision ' (Gen. 43.1634; 1 Sam. 20.27; Eccl. 10.19; etc.). But we do not find the word 'provision linked to the name of a particular person other than to that of Solomon (even though in Neh. 5.14 the phrase 'the bread of the governor' is encountered). It would seem, therefore, that with the collocation of this phrase with the details of the provision, the narrator desires to glorify the reign of Solomon by stating that the vanquished peoples presented him with gifts. I encounter these descriptions with the kings of yore, amongst whom it was customary to have a multitude of officials and functionaries, and therefore the great quantity of provender required for one day does not surprise.105 The description of 'Solomon's provision' comes at the centre (which is not the ideastic climax), in order to extol the greatness of Solomon's reign and to reflect the central idea that is stated at the peripheries: the wealth of the kingdom and his dominance of the nations.106

105. Ahasuerus (485-465 BCE) who was outstanding for extravagance without bounds, a superlative host whose table was brimming with a cornucopia of delicacies of the finest sort, including beef, mutton and poultry. See Weissbach 1911: 115. Documents concerning 'the king's banquets' were found in Mari. It is apparent from these that the sumptuous quantities mentioned in the Bible, as well as in this section of the text, are a monthly summary. Cf. Malamat 1991: 39-40. 106. Anyway it provides an answer to Malbim's contention: in accordance with the order he had to count from the beginning 'and Solomon's provender' and afterwards he says 'and Solomon reigned' etc., because 'he ruled over all the land to the West of the river'.

136

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

This pivot pattern comprises, therefore, the closing remarks of the narrator on Solomon's kingdom, on his dominance of the nations 'all the days of his life' (5.1), and of a list of 'Solomon's provision for one day' (5.2).107 The combination of these matters creates a pivot pattern whose purpose is a panegyric to Solomon's extended and peaceful reign, when 'he had peace on all sides round about' (5.4). Solomon's dominance of the nations enabled him108 to serve the vast quantities of food mentioned at his table. The description of the abundant riches, his dominance of the nations and the peace and tranquillity all the days of his life are presented in a pivot pattern in order to stress the nature of Solomon's reign. 10. Menahem Son ofGadi Pays Tax to Put (2 Kings 15.18-21) A And he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord: he departed not all his days from the sins of Jeraboam, the son of Nebath, who made Israel to sin (v. 18) B And Pul the king of Assyria came against the land (v. 19) C And Menahem gave Pul a thousand talents of silver X that his hand might be with him to strengthen the kingdom in his hand C' and Menahem exacted the money from Israel, from all the mighty men of wealth of each man fifty shekels of silver. to give to the king of Assyria (v. 20) B' So the king of Assyria turned back and stayed not there in the land A' And the rest of the acts of Menahem, and all that he did, are indeed written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel (v. 21)

The pivot pattern above comprises the author's account of the reign of Menahem the son of Gadi, king of Israel. The structure does not include verses from the framework consisting of the commencement and the conclusion109 (the synchronization and description of his death, vv. 17, 22) but the verses characterizing the reign of Menahem, that is 107. Lists of abundance are found also in the inscription of Sargon (ANET, 268) and also in those of the Egyptian Kings. 108. Cf. Radak: for he reigned—the rationale, for the deer and the fallow deer which were brought to him as a gift from throughout the Eastern side of the river. 109. While vv. 18, 21 are found in reports on other kings, they contain shades of appraisal by the author: 2 Kgs 15.11—'and all that he had done'—the words are omitted. 15.9—'and all that his forefathers had done'—additional words which are not in this section of the text.

3. Action and Outcome

137

to say: a religious assessment by the author and a central historical event in the time of his reign, the issue of the tax paid to Pul the king of Assyria. The commencement of the pattern consists of the author's assessment of Menahem king of Israel: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord: he departed not all his days from110 the sins of Jeroboam the son ofNebat (v. 18)m—This is a formula which was customary for the kings of Israel (see 1 Kgs 22.53; 2 Kgs 13.2). Only they committed the iniquities of Jeroboam king of Israel, he who split the kingdom with religious transgressions, the nature of which is not elaborated upon in this section of the text. In the parallel element of the structure, at the conclusion, we encounter the following: 'And the rest of the acts of Menahem and all that he did, are indeed written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel.' This is in contrast to the doing of evil, 'all that he did\ a phrase found also at the end of the reign of other kings (1 Kgs 16.5, 27; 2 Kgs 8.23; etc.). In the second element of the pattern it is stated as follows: (in his days) 'Pw/ 112 the king of Assyria came against the land' (v. 19). The author mentions this detail after 'and he did that which was evil in the eyes of the Lord' in order to prove that as a result of his iniquitous actions the king of Assyria came against him to punish him, in accord with the religious outlook of the author. In the parallel element is encountered the departure of the Assyrian 110. The words 'of all' occur in LXX. It appears that they are correct in accordance with what is written in 2 Kgs 14.24. 111. The expression—'all his days' does not occur other than in the description of Menahem. There are those of the opinion (Ehrlich 1900) that this expression requires the word 'before' before it, and not 'before it', and the scriptural text distorts this and reads as follows: 'he departed not all of his days from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat'. There are those who are of the opinion that this constitutes haplographia and the expression 'all his days' serves as an introduction to the following verse (Ehrlich 1900). There are those who follow the LXX version in which the expression at the end of v. 18 is omitted because it rightfully belongs to the following verse: 'in his days Pul came up' as occurs in v. 29. Cf. Tur-Sinai (1965) and Cogan-Tadmor (1988), etc. 112. Pul (who is mentioned too in 1 Chron. 5.26) which is an alternative name for Tiglath-pileser who is known from the later cuneiform and from the GrecoPtolemaic Canon. There is no proof that this name was given to the Assyrian king at his coronation, in contemporary Babylonian documents. The name Pul is widely known and its meaning is limestone. Cf. Tadmor 1971; Cogan-Tadmor 1988.

138

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

king from the land.'50 the king of Assyria turned back and stayed not there in the land1 (v. 20). This word pair which expresses the contrast between 'he came ' and 'he turned back is also encountered in 2 Kgs 18.17 ('Rabshakeh ... and they came'), 19.8 ('and Rabshakeh returned'), in 19.33 ('By the way that he came, by that way shall he return'), and also in 2 Kgs 5.9, 15 in a pivot pattern.113 The Assyrian king returned to his place, because he received tribute from Menahem, king of Israel. In other words: the kingdom of Israel had become a vassal. In the third element of the pattern the gift of money which the king of Assyria had received is mentioned: 'and Menahem gave Pul a thousand talents of silver' (v. 19). The giving of the money as either a bribe or a tribute to the king who would assist him in war, or as a sign of subjugation, is frequently encountered in Scripture (cf. 1 Kgs 15.18, 19; 2 Kgs 18.14-15, 23.33, etc.). In the light of what is stated here (in his days) Pul came—apparently because Menahem had raised a tribute and had agreed to become subject to him, in order that he would vacate his kingdom (cf. 2 Kgs 18.13-16). In the section of the text referred to the principal agreement to give the money is discussed in the nature of: the general followed by the specific: 'and Menahem exacted114 the money from Israel, from all the mighty men of wealth, of each man fifty shekels of silver, to give to the king of Assyria' (v. 20). The manner in which the money was given is detailed here: the amount of money was large, and therefore Menahem imposed it upon the wealthy men.115 According to the text, he did not remove the money from the treasury of the kingdom as both Asa (2 Kgs 15.18) and Joash (2 Kgs 12.19) had done, but from the citizens who could afford it.116 113. The word pair come-return is common in verb pairs indicating a decree and its implementation. Cf. Num. 23.16-17, as well as Kravitz 1971: 17. 114. This taking out is unique in the Bible and therefore amends it to 'and he commanded' (Klosterman [1887] who deletes 'the money' and reads—'And Menahem commanded all Israel and all the mighty men of wealth'). This change is not necessary because a similar expression is found in Akkadian: susu—to provide, to pay (Cogan-Tadmor 1988). 115. These were men of substance like Kish, father of Saul, and Boaz, who were called 'mighty men of wealth' (1 Sam. 9.1; Ruth 2.1), heads of socio-economic units who carried the burden of the king's debts. Cf. Bendor 1986: 118. 116. Cogan-Tadmor (1918) are of the opinion that this heavy tax was exacted mainly from the Temple treasury, and only a small proportion of it was taken from the mighty men of wealth. In contrast to that, Efal (1982: 122) maintains that

3. Action and Outcome

139

Possibly because of this the narrator stresses that the king exacted the money 'from Israel', both to distinguish between him and the king of Assyria and to emphasize that the money was not withdrawn from the coffers of state (as was the case with the Temple in the Kingdom of Judaea). And thus a certain asymmetry is created which does not affect the pivot pattern adversely, by the addition of the name 'Israel', which is mentioned both at the commencement and the conclusion but without parallelism in the parallel element. At the climax of the structure we encounter the purpose of granting the money to Pul: that his hand might be with him to strengthen the kingdom in his hand

The genitive pronominal suffix in the words 'his hands'117 refers to Pul, that Pul's hand might strengthen118 the kingdom in the hands of Menahem, apparently because the king of Israel sought to consolidate the insecure position of the kingdom and of his internally unstable government (v. 16) with the assistance of the Assyrian king119 and ultimately to restore it to its prior position. The episode which concerns itself with the reign of Menahem is structured in the form of a pivot pattern. Even though the introduction and the conclusion are conventional, as is the case with the reign of other kings, 'and he did—he did' (see vv. 24, 26 in this chapter), the narrator builds the remaining details of Menahem's reign, in the form of pivot parallelism, with the committing of evil at its inception and at its conclusion, 'and all that he did', stated in general terms. The essential aspect of the structure is a description of the servitude of the kingdom of Israel under Pul, the king of Assyria, together with a description of the raising of the tribute. It is interesting to note that in the introductory phrases he is alluded to both by his name and by his title 'Pul, king of Assyria' (v. 19) in contrast to 'king of Assyria' (v. 20). There is no doubt that the latter reference in v. 20, 'the king of Menahem was forced to impose the tax on the mighty men of wealth, because the treasury was depleted. 117. Ehrlich (1900) is of the opinion that there is a typographical error here and it should be 'his hand'—in the singular, as in 2 Sam. 14; 19 and even as it is stated contrary to the plural: 'their hand was with David— 118. To strengthen the kingdom in his hand'—a unique expression. In LXX the word 'to strengthen' is omitted. See Cogan-Tadmor 1988. 119. It would appear to me that it is exaggerated to say 'that Israel would be enslaved by Assyria at Menahem's initiative' (Liver 1968: 32).

140

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Assyria', despite its having been mentioned prior to this in the same verse, serves to emphasize that the tribute satisfied him, and that the king of Assyria 'stayed not there in the land'. That is to say, Menahem acted consciously, as an independent king, so to speak, without the king of Assyria's presence in Judaea. The giving of the money to Pul is recounted in detail in the parallel element: Menahem imposes a tax on the men of wealth, owners of extensive property. At the climax of the structure, the purpose (which includes the reason), the giving of the money to the king of Assyria, is that he will support Menahem's kingdom, so that he (Menahem) will be able to control it, possibly against domestic adversaries and possibly and apparently even more so in order that the kingdom will remain stable, and its inhabitants will not go into exile. It would seem that this pattern is utilized in the summary of Menahem's reign because he was the last king of Israel who preserved its independence (albeit at the cost of a vassal's tribute). During the period in which the assassin of his son, Pekah son of Ramaliah, reigned, portions of Israel's territory were surrendered (15.29) and its inhabitants were exiled to Assyria. In the time of Hosea son of Ela, the murderer of Pekah son of Ramaliah, the raising of the tribute ceased, the exiles of Israel arrived in Assyria, and the Northern Kingdom was destroyed. This subject is given emphasis by being placed in a pivot pattern: in the testimony given by the Deuteronomic editor, he describes here Menahem's motivation, as a result of the pressure imposed on him by a rampant Assyrian kingdom, to preserve Israel's independence within its own borders: 'to strengthen the kingdom in his hand' (v. 19). 11. Summary In this chapter I have analysed structures in which action and resultant outcome are presented. In the majority of the patterns we encounter only the words of the narrator120 as he depicts acts of violence in the main: death, murder, war, persecution, kidnapping and conquest. It would appear that killing is a dramatic topic which makes the use of a conspicuous literary structure obligatory: the narrator is assisted by the pivot structure in describing the action and its outcome in both its segments, when the climax is at the centre of the pattern. Furthermore, 120. Besides 2 Sam. 12.16-20, in which a dialogue of three words between David and his servants occurs, in v. 19.

3. Action and Outcome

141

it is appropriate that descriptions of violence of this nature are presented by the omniscient narrator, rather than by one or another of the characters, whose knowledge and insights are more restricted.121 It is not surprising, therefore, that in a structure such as an action and its outcome more descriptions of violent acts are depicted than in other types of structures, in which the remarks of the characters constitute the essence of the content.122 In five of the structures we find actions whose consequences follow the event in immediate succession;123 but in three of the structures we find static situations depicted, constituting a summing up of the events—conclusion or situation, so to speak;124 another of the structures involves an act of editing and interweaving a list together with a situation (the realm).125 An action precedes its outcome which is consequent upon it. This is the case in three of the structures.126 In these the outcome, flowing directly from an act, is depicted in the second section, after the pivot, and is linked to the act, by either identical words or words in parallel. In two further patterns this order of an act followed by its outcome is presented. But in the pivots either the reason for the outcome (1 Sam. 23.14-15) or the purpose of the act, which precedes the outcome (2 Kgs 15.18-21), are presented. But periodically, even within the pivot pattern, a possibility presents itself for the narrator to commence with the outcome, to proceed to a description of the action and then to return once again to the outcome expressed in words which are almost identical to the commencement. This is the case in Judg. 9.56-57, for example, which opens and concludes with an act of measure for measure, presented at the centre ('which he did to his father'). So also in 2 Sam. 3.36, he commences

121. For clarification of the issue cf. between 1 Sam. 4.10 and vv. 11-17: the words of the man of Benjamin are briefer than those of the narrator and not only because of excitement. 122. Possibly because of this, because there are no dialogues here, the patterns are short and consist of three elements (2 patterns), of five elements (4 patterns) and of seven elements (3 patterns). 123. Judg. 18.16-17; 1 Sam. 17.51-54, 31.9-10; 2 Sam. 12.16-20; 2 Kgs 15.1821. 124. Judg. 9.56-57; 1 Sam. 23.14-15; 2 Sam. 3.36. 125. The reign of Solomon—the provender of Solomon (1 Kgs 4.20-5.5). 126. 1 Sam. 17.51-54, 31.9-10; 2 Sam. 12.16-20.

142

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

and concludes with the outcome, while the action of the king is presented at the climax—the centre of the pattern (and in a similar sentence: 'as all the king had done'). Possibly positioning the consequence before the deed results from the fact that the deeds of the leader have been mentioned previously, and therefore the narrator commences by stressing the consequence of these deeds, both as a Divine response and as a response by the people. I infer from this that these structures, which describe an action and a response, are actually not of one kind in that side by side with the structures in which the consequence follows the action in immediate succession, structures exist, in which the consequence precedes the action, or structures, where the aim of, or the reason for the action separates it from its consequence. Examination of the structures which depict an action and its outcome reveal a somewhat surprising finding. Only in two of these structures have I found that the outcome is presented at the centre of the structure (Judg. 18.16; 1 Sam. 17.52) and in two additional structures the action is depicted at the centre of the pattern (Judg. 9.56; 1 Sam. 31.9. In five (out of nine) of the structures neither the action nor the outcome is placed at the centre of the structure and they are replaced there by either elucidation of the situation (2 Sam. 12.18) or the reason for the event (1 Sam. 23.15; 2 Sam. 3.36; 2 Kgs 15.19) or a list (1 Kgs 5.23). From this I infer that in half of the number of structures of this type not only the action and its consequence comprise the structure but also further elements are added. This element, the reason for the event particularly, is presented at the centre of the structure because of the significance that the narrator bestows upon it.

Chapter 4 THE LANGUAGE OF REPRIMAND

1. Introduction Included in this chapter are structures in which are encountered the words of the dramatis personae (the author's comments are confined to one transitional passage only) who reprimand their interlocutors. It is clear that the biblical narrator who is cognizant of every aspect of the heroes' condition in detail will depict moments of tension between them as well, tension which will bring in its wake a harsh exchange of words including the language of reprimand. Scripture employs two major methods of depicting the reaction of the recipient of the reprimand: (a)

(b)

The absence of a reaction entirely, which is actually the reaction par excellence (cf. Exod. 5.4-5). This results in a monologue. A response, sometimes in the language of the one delivering the reprimand (cf. Gen. 16.5-6). This results in a dialogue.

A pivot pattern is created by the latter method, with the essence of the subject matter situated at its climax. In the former method, where we do not encounter the reaction of the one reprimanded, the language of the one who delivers the reprimand repeats itself (but in inverted order) with changes in vocabulary, in order to stress its harshness. These changes carry with them specific meaning. Most certainly the pivot pattern is appropriate to both one who execrates and one who reproaches, in that they require their words to be stressed and to reverberate in the ears of their auditor. Both these modes of reaction find expression in the structures in this chapter.

144

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets 2. Joab's Words to David (2 Samuel 3.24-25)

And Joab came to the king and said: A

What hast thou done? (v. 24) behold, Abner came to thee X why hast thou sent him away, and he is quite gone? B1 Thou knowst Abner son of Ner that he came to deceive thee (v. 25) A1 and to know thy going out and thy coming in and to know all that thoudS£§t B

This episode includes the words of Joab to David, after he had become aware that Abner son of Ner, the commander of the army of Israel, had come to King David and 'he had sent him away and he has gone in peace' (2 Sam. 3.23). These words which remain without a response from David, who holds his peace, are situated between sections which describe actions. In vv. 21-23 we encounter the author's description of David's dispatching Abner in peace, in vv. 26-27 how Joab murders Abner with guile. Joab's remarks follow the events that precede them, and they represent a form of 'justification' for that which is to follow, the slaying of Abner. If in the episode previous to Joab's words David is active, in that he prepares a banquet for Abner and his men (v. 20) and sends him on his way in peace (v. 21), then in this episode David is decidedly passive. Neither his reply nor his reaction is stated in any way, and in the following episode in which Abner's assassination is recounted (vv. 2627), it is clearly asserted that 'David knew it not' (v. 26). There is recognition here, certainly, of an artistic consideration by the author. There is no response from David to Joab's rash language. David's silence at this moment makes Joab's assault and the advantage which he enjoys more prominent. It is possible to aver that this in fact is a dialogue, and the absence of a response is the replacement for a response, and one side of the dialogue comprises speech whereas the other consists of silence. This provides a dramatic episode, similar to Joab's remarks to David in 19.6-8 (Gelender 1983: 45). This episode is located at the centre of a broader picture (3.12-39), whose concern is the attempt to transfer the kingdom of Israel, by means of 'the mighty man' within it, Abner son of Ner, to David's kingdom, and David's reaction to the murder of Abner. Joab's words, his rebuke of the king, are situated therefore at the centre of this picture

4. The Language of Reprimand

145

from the point of view of its form,1 as well as from the point of view of its content. It, too, is structured as a pivot pattern, for the sake of emphasis. And Joab came to the king (v. 24)—Joab's coming to the king is parallel to that of Abner ben Ner: the former arrives with his men (v. 20) as does the latter—the servants of David (v. 22). As the one departs the other arrives. This adds a dramatic piquancy to the narrative.2 Apparently the variation in designation (the king in place of David) allows the narrator to allude to the character of the officers and their relationship with David. As far as Abner, who is the commander of the army of Ish Bosheth, king of the tribes of Israel (2 Sam. 2.9), is concerned David is not yet king. Consequently, in the narrator's version Abner comes to David. But as he seeks David's kinship, he approaches David politely using the title 'my lord the king' (v. 21). In the case of Joab, however, David is the king. Therefore he is termed the king in this episode. But the roles seem to have been reversed when one examines the vocabulary. Abner approaches David with the politeness due to a king whereas Joab's approach is far from being interpreted as polite: he addresses him as David and not as the king! His language characterizes him as speaker. It is not surprising that at the conclusion of Joab's tirade it is stated, 'And when Joab was come out from David' (v. 26), and not 'from the king'. This results from the character of his language: he came to the king, and he went out from David. And said: What hast thou done!—His words, consisting of a rhetorical question, constitute a conventional introduction to a complaint in Scripture.3 His complaint, Joab's rebuke, is couched in the following language: What hast thou done? behold, Abner came to thee w/ry-hast thou sent him away and he is quite gone? I encounter similar versions in Scripture, for example 'what hast thou done to me, behold" (Num. 23.11).4 1. Joab's words (vv. 24-25) are situated at the centre of this episode with twelve verses before them and fourteen verses after them. 2. Cf. 1 Kgs 1.22: 'And behold, while she was yet talking with the King, Nathan the Prophet also came in.' This also applies to Job 1.16-18. 3. Part of them constitute the complaints of the children of Israel in the desert. Cf. Gen. 12.18, 20.9, 26.10; Exod. 14.11; etc. Cf. Labuschagne 1973: 9. 4. 1 Sam. 21.15: 'Behold...why'; 28.9: 'Behold ... and why'.

146

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

and the version closest to this:5 what hast thou done to me? did not I serve with thee for Rachel? why then hast thou beguiled me? (Gen. 29.25).

Apparently there is a free interchange of the words 'indeed behold with similar functions. Although the LXX reads 'why ... did not you know (cf. 'behold [he came] t8o\)rjX9ev-indeed [for Rachel] o\) rcept'), it would seem, however, that the translator was influenced by various other versions, in which the words 'did not' occur, as in the questions, the complaints, in Gen. 29.25, Judg. 15.11, Neh. 13.17-18. Joab's complaint is expressed as a question (Ogushi 1978: 21), and the speech appears to be a monologue. The question which is raised before David is in the form of a protest.6 The verb in this complaint (as in others) is in the perfect tense ('came', 'sent him' and, in Gen. 31.2830, 'needs begone', 'done foolishly'), in order to indicate that the action which results in the complaint has already been concluded prior to it. The question is always in the form of a sort of inquiry into the nature of the deed and into the responsibility therefore. Here, too, there 5. The textual design closest to this passage occurs in Gen. 31.26-27: 'And Laban said to Jacob: What hast thou done, that thou hast cheated me... Why didst thou flee away secretly?' Principally because of the following parallelisms: 2 Sam. 3:

why is it that thou hast sent him away he came to deceive thee he is quite gone all that thou doest

(v. 24) (v. 25) (v. 24) (v. 25)

In parallel with: Gen. 31:

sent thee away with mirth thou hast deceived me and now would needst be gone thou hast done foolishly It is in the power of my hand to do you hurt

(v. 27) (v. 26) (v. 30) (vv. 28-29)

6. Joab reprimands the king both after Absalom's rebellion and his death (19.6-8). But there he reprimands the king in order that he will go out to the people and acknowledge their respect and that the nation will acknowledge the honour that the king pays to them. The object of this exercise is positive. Here however it is in order to annoy the King and not out of respect for him. What he says demonstrates his desire to cast Abner off. Here he provokes the King before the murder. There (in 2 Sam. 19)—subsequent to the murder. Cf. Gunn (1976: 215); Ogushi 1978: 50.

4. The Language of Reprimand

147

is a type of direct or indirect accusation (Coats 1968: 30). Certain of the verbs are in the infinitive construct ('to bring', 'to kill'—Exod. 17.3; Num. 20.5) in order to define the nature of the desired consequence of the action described by the principal verb. In this section of the text the absolute infinitive also occurs in order to reinforce the action—'needs begone Behold Abner came to thee why hast thou sent him away and he is quite gone? Joab rebukes David in a fashion not befitting remarks addressed to the king.7 This question resembles Joab's inquiry of the man who tells him: 'Behold thou sawest him, and why didst thou not smite him there to the ground?' (2 Sam. 18.11). 'Behold' is used to emphasize the fact prior to the conclusion which links it well with 'Behold, the servants of David, and Joab came' (v. 22) because the deed had already taken place and Joab told him that it was not his duty to perform that act, but rather to make inquires about it (Ehrlich [1900] on this chapter). Joab rebukes David, because he has sent away in peace the commander of the army of Israel, who stood, like Satan, in the way of David's obtaining dominion over the whole of Israel when it was already in his hand to do so. Why hast thou sent him away, and he is quite gone? (v. 24). The question, with its implied accusation, resembles the contention of the son of the prophets against Ahab for having liberated Ben-Hadad the King of Aram, after the battle between them: 'Because thou hast let go out of thy hand8 a man whom I have devoted to destruction, therefore thy life shall go for his life' (1 Kgs 20.42.). 'And he has quite gone away' The absolute infinitive is used here for the purposes of emphasis (like 'he will surely judge —Gen. 19.9) possibly to indicate the ease with which Abner left David's presence (Smith 1899). This phrase which concludes Joab's question (vv. 24, 25—a declarative sentence) draws the attention to the profound significance of the narrator's literary sophistication. The author depicts David's dismissal of Abner by employing the phrase 'and he went in peace' three times (vv. 21, 22, 23). By way of this threefold repetition, the loyal and sincere relationship 7. Abarbanel is of the opinion that he drew courage from his heroism and from his return with much spoil. A further example of the army chiefs impertinence and disrespect for his king occurs in this chapter, when Abner speaks with gross rudeness to Ishbosheth (vv. 8-10). 8. In the piel (strong active) conjugation, like Joab, denoting 'set free'.

148

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

which David has with Abner is expressed with emphasis (Zalevski 1981: 100). But when Joab comes to complain to David that he has sent Abner away, Joab exchanges the word peace, for the word gone: 'behold Abner came to thee why hast thou sent him away, and he is quite gone'.9 And this substitution alludes to what is about to happen (Alter 1988: 120; Zalevski 1981: 100). There is a type of 'about three and about four' here, and the surprising change appears a fourth time, as it does in the parables of Balam (Num. 24), the dispatching of the messengers of Ahazia (2 Kgs 1), etc. (cf. Zakovitch 1979: 100-109, 282-89, etc.). The narrator alludes to the word peace which has been omitted by employing a word which is similar in sound, in order to emphasize the contrast between the two situations:10 'Joab took him aside to the gate to speak to him quietly (v. 27).n This is an example where the repetition of a phrase which differs ab initio from the original, which depicts an event of considerable drama, and within the context of which there is a series of precise repetitions, concludes in a way diametrically opposed to the original, while displaying great artistic sophistication merely by substituting one word for another, enabling one to grasp the intention of the narrator. An additional reason for the repetitions of the phrase is the impression created by the rumour, which increases with mounting intensity, from the first occasion 'And David sent [Abner away]; and he went in peace' (v. 21) until the fourth repetition—Joab's reaction—which is designed to reinforce the impression, that Joab erupts as a natural and unavoidable consequence of this accumulation of tension (cf. Gelender 1983: 169-70). Thou knowst Abner son ofNer, that he came to deceive thee (v. 25)— LXX reads '[the evil of\ Abner', but this does not seem to be justified. Malbim is of the opinion that 'thou knowst Abner' resembles a generalization followed by a specification: 'that he came to deceive thee'—that you will go out unto him and will fall into his net, and if he is unable to achieve this—'to know thy going out and thy coming in', and if he is unable to achieve even this—'to know all that thou doest'. But the 9. This alteration reinforces the opinion that the change in LXX 'and did he not go in peace' occurs as a result of the influence exerted by the verse mentioned and by other verses in the Bible. Cf. Segal 1964 on this verse, as well. 10. And on the 'peace', as a prelude to the spilling of blood see Klaus (1986b: 265ff.). 11. Jer. 12.1, Radak says as follows: 'quietly i means in peace'.

4. The Language of Reprimand

149

correctness of his opinion is very doubtful. To deceive thee —with lies, in order to win your loyalty (cf. 1 Kgs 22.20-22). And to know thy going out and thy coming in (v. 25)12—Segal (1964) explains as follows: all your interests and concerns (in accordance with Deut. 28.6; Ps. 121.8), or the place where you depart and the place where you enter. That is to say: Abner came to spy out and to explore the city of Hebron. And it is the latter explanation which appears to be correct, in that the expression 'to go out and to come in' (Josh. 14.11) is connected with war. So, in the case of David 'and he went out and he came in before the people' (1 Sam. 18.13, 16), as well as 'thy going out and thy coming in with me in the camp' (1 Sam. 29.6, 2 Sam. 5.2), regarding David in the eyes of Achish, king of Gath, meaning, going into the field of battle. Joab maintains, therefore, that Abner came on a mission of intelligence gathering, in order to establish the military methods and activities of David, so that he would gain an advantage for the house of Saul in the coming war (2 Sam. 3.6) (McCarter 1984). As we have already seen, Abner and Joab 'came in' to David, one after the other. But whereas in the case of Abner the verbs 'he sent' and 'he went' are most prominent (vv. 21, 22, 32), the most prominent verb in the story of Joab is 'come' (twice in vv. 22, 23, twice in v. 24, and in v. 25 'thy coming in'). Whereas in v. 26 Joab 'went out'. There is a clear contrast here between 'will come in—will go ouf. After Joab has made his final speech which does not include a concluding word, the last 'accord' remains like a departure in anger expressed in words: 'and Joab went out' (the opening of the following episode). After the scene has opened with Joab's arrival (v. 22), apparently, it is possible to see his coming in and his going out applying to Joab, balanced with 'and to know thy going out and thy coming in' in his speech to David. Suddenly, with the forceful appearance of Joab, his strength and his importance are conveyed. So that 'his going out and his coming in' seem both practical and realistic, at the same time that David's plans become 'vacuous' and about to dissolve.13 12. This represents an attraction. According to the Radak this is the kethib and the version to be read is the correct one in accordance with the category of verbs where the second radical 'waw' is weak. The version to be read is based on the coupling of words which is a linguistic convention in many places, i.e. to change the vowels in order to pair the verbs as in 13. Cf. 'And David knew it not', Gelender 1983: 169-70.

150

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

'And to know ... and to know'—in contrast to the phrase 'thou knowst' spoken by David the phrase uttered by Abner 'and to know' signifies his intention to spy out the land and to know all that is being done by David. This insolence and impertinence towards the king stands out in the same way that it finds expression in the time of David's mourning after the death of Absalom (2 Sam. 19.6-8).14 The pivot pattern in Joab's speech stems from its emphasis: the impetuous remarks that Joab makes to David after he has sent Abner away in peace are situated in the centre of the section dealing with the attempt to transfer the tribes of Israel to David's realm (3.12-39)—and that too is structured in pivot form. At both the commencement and the conclusion of the remarks, the sentence 'what hast thou done as opposed to 'he did , occurs. Initially his question is rhetorical—Joab's complaint is couched in the style of the narrative of complaints. At the conclusion of his speech—Abner's desire to spy out the land and to become acquainted with everything that David does becomes evident. Prima facie, Joab and Abner are desirous of establishing what the king does. But their questions appear to be 'pseudo'-questions. Joab's question is a rhetorical tirade and the assertion that Abner has come to deceive and to ascertain David's comings and goings, appears false. In the second and fourth lines a parallel exists, and these lines are also parallel to the lines closest to them (the first and the last). In the second line—the indication of a fact, from which the complaint flows, and which is given emphasis by the formulaic opening 'behold'— 'Abner came to thee'—and you had the opportunity to capture him and did not exploit it. In the fourth line, Abner arrives, but the reason for his arrival is not known to David, it would seem that it has actually been hidden from him: Abner 'came to deceive thee'. In the second element Joab calls him by name, 'Abner', because Abner is well known and famous. When he mentions (in the fourth element) that David knew and was acquainted with Abner, his family, and his exploits in the past, he mentions the name of his father as well: 'Abner son ofNer'.15 14. Attention should be paid to the fact that after his reprimand subsequent to the murder of Absalom, David did not respond verbally either, but by acting: he rose up and sat in the gate. But here it is possible to rationalize this by dint of David's state of mind after the death of his son. 15. Therefore it is unnecessary to accept the addition in LXX LV to v. 24:

4. The Language of Reprimand

151

In the second and fourth lines additional parallels to the adjacent lines occur, contrasting parallels between Joab and Abner who are rivals in the role of army commander. In parallel and in contrast to the 'his coming' applying to Joab (mentioned for the third time—vv. 22, 23, 24), Joab says to David that 'Abner came to thee', but with a different motive attributed to him by David. In the fourth line the verb 'knows' appears—David 'knows' and is familiar with Abner son of Ner (from the aspect: ' Oh Lord, Thou hast searched me and known me' [Ps. 139.1]), all his deeds, parallel and in contrast to Abner's desire 'to know' David's going out and coming in, and 'to know' all that David does. At the centre of the structure is the complaint: 'why hast thou sent him away and he is quite gone'. The allusion here is clearly to that which is anticipated in the future. 'And he is quite gone > a deviation from the repetition 'and he has gone in peace indicates that Joab's intentions towards Abner are not peaceful, particularly when 'going' is interpreted as equal to 'dying' (Alter 1988: 120). The allusion at the climax of the pattern, that he has sent his enemy away, and therefore his life (that is Abner's) is in his hands, is immediately realized (vv. 26-27), where it is stated by the narrator, 'and David knew it not' (v. 26), in contrast to Thou knowst Abner son of Ner' (v. 25) and in contrast to Abner's wish 'to know' (repeated twice) David's way of life and the features of his reign. This parallelism illustrates the irony that exists here: David is not aware that Abner has come to deceive him (in Joab's opinion), and he is also not aware that Joab wishes to kill Abner. 'Thou knowst Abner the son of Ner'—but he does not know Joab ... Possibly the climax of the episode is connected to its extremities: 'why' is parallel to 'what', in the first line, and 'hast thou sent him away, and he is quite gone' is parallel to 'thy going out and thy coming in', in the final line of the structure. Joab's scathing remarks are worthy of a place at the centre of the episode, both to indicate the weakness of the king's position and also to hint at what is to be in the future, and at the array of relationships between David and Joab throughout: the impertinence and insolence of the military commander towards his king, the murders of the military commanders and the prince—Abner, Absalom and Amasa. 'Abner [son of Ner]'. The addition only appears acceptable in the light of what is written in v. 25.

152

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

This complex network of relationships between the sons of Zerviah and David, particularly the harshest of them, which are those between Joab, commander of the army, and the king, opens with a sharp reprimand directed at the king, which serves as an introduction to what is about to take place in the future. The significance of these words is expressed by the use of direct speech: despite the fact that this is the most appropriate instrument for conveying conversation, it is possible to determine that, as in many other places, there is considerable artistic intention here: in the distinction made, by the narrator, between that which appears in the same connection in direct speech, and between that which is conveyed by brief, concentrated reports (vv. 21-23, 26-27) made by the narrator. The author has the ability to discern when the avoidance of the use of reports adds to the emphasis placed on the essence of the story and the presentation of his (the author's) personal attitudes. This is the case in our section of the text, as well as in 2 Sam. 19.6-8 (Gelender 1983: 74). The author acted wisely when he expressed these events in the form of a pivot pattern in order to indicate the significance of these things in their place, the episode concerning the relationships between JoabDavid-Abner. 3. The Dialogue between Michal and David (2 Samuel 6.20-22 )16 And Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David and said: A How honourable was the king of Israel today B in that he uncovered himself today in the eyes of the handmaids of his servants C as one of the low fellows shamelessly uncovers himself D And David said to Michal, it was before the Lord who chose me before your father and before all his house X to appoint me prince over the people of the Lord, over Israel D1 Therefore will I play before the Lord C and / mil yet be more lightly esteemed \ than this, B' holding myself lowly in my own eyes: and of the maidservants of whom thou hast spoken; A' of them shall I be had in honour.

This pivot structure consists of a dialogue between Michal and David, and its bounds are extremely clearly defined: vv. 20b-22. While 16. Cf. the structure that Brueggemann cites (1990: 252).

4. The Language of Reprimand 153 the first section of v. 20 specifies the remarks of the narrator on the advent of David to bless his house and Michal's going out to meet him, v. 23 does not belong (directly) to the dialogue between Michal and David, and possibly is a consequence of it.17 In order to understand thoroughly the conversation between Michal and David we would have to consider the contents of the verses prior to the conversation, meticulously. That is to say, vv. 16 and 20a. Apparently, v. 16 brings the conversation forward either in order to establish a link between two events, the bringing up of the Ark and David's blessing the people and his house, or in order to abandon Michal to her rage, while David performs his ritualistic duties. According to this verse, Michal looks through the window and waits, it would seem, for David's arrival with the Ark (the verb-'looks' niphal perfect, does not propel the plot forward. The advancing of the plot is expressed by the verbs 'and she saw' and 'and she despised'). David returned to bless his house after blessing the people in the name of 'The Lord of Hosts' (v. 18). At a time of spiritual exultation, he sees Michal, daughter of Saul who 'came out to meet him'. The phrase 'came out to meet' appears here in the sense of the going out (of a woman or women) to greet the victors in war.18 This was the case with Miriam the prophetess (Exod. 15.20-21), as well as Jephtah's daughter who came out to meet him 'with timbrels and with dances' (Judg. 11.34). It also applies to the episode with David (1 Sam. 18.6-7). The going out is accompanied by dances of victory and of celebration,19 17. Sacon (1982: 48) as well. He perceives a pivot pattern in this episode, by joining v. 23 to the structure. This does not appear correct to me, because this verse is not part of the conversation, but is separate from it. Therefore it does not seem that the pivot in this episode is the phrase 'before the Lord' as it appears in his version of the structure. 18. And in two additional links: going to war (Num. 21.23; Josh. 8.14) and going out to greet somebody (usually who he has not seen for a long time [Exod. 4.14, 18.7] etc.). And two exceptional instances: 'And Leah went out to meet him and said' (Gen. 30.6), but this too involves a dispute between sisters. So too with the Alien-negative woman: 'So I came out to meet thee' (Prov. 7.5). On one occasion a man goes out to meet a victor 'and the King of Sodom went out to meet him [Abraham] after he returned from smiting' (Gen. 14.17). 19. Cf. the similar language in Jeremiah: 'And out of them shall proceed thanksgiving and the voice of them that make merry' (30.19); 'and thou shalt again be adorned with thy timbrels, and shalt go out dancing with them that make merry' (31.4).

154

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

with joy and song. These are the words used to describe Michal in this chapter (20) 'and Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David and said'. This description of Michal's going to meet her husband leads the reader to anticipate an idyllic story (Poethig 1989: 85). Actually David is not returning from war, but from the act of bringing the Ark up to the city of David 'with shouting, and with the sound of the ram's horn' (v. 15). But there is great joy, and the style of the opening would lead us to expect words of benison and praise from Michal. But this introduction is ironic, in that the anticipated blessing becomes a curse and supercilious words of scorn in her mouth. David returns to his wife, and the daughter of Saul comes out to greet him. David returns to his family, his house, and those who come out to greet him are from the house of Saul ('Michal, daughter of Saul') (Abramsky, Shu 1980: 118). The author repeats her father's name ('daughter of Saul') twice in addition (vv. 16, 23) with obviously clear intentions. Michal, daughter of Saul, appears before us and before David, and in her scorning of David her punishment is anticipated, and not as Michal the wife of David, as we encountered her at the beginning of their relationship (1 Sam. 19.11—'and Michal his wife told David'). In v. 20 the author returns to her relationship with Saul by saying that the source of her remarks was Saul's leadership as well as his opinion of David. In contrast to this Michal is called by her name only by the narrator (v. 21), and this appears to be in accordance with David's view, as he responds to her with annoyance at her harsh words: 'and David said to Michal' and not 'Michal daughter of Saul' as previously (and it would have been singularly inappropriate if he had used that appellation). It was as if he was not speaking to his wife here, nor to the daughter of Saul, in that her behaviour20 was that of neither a queen nor the daughter of a king, as he perceived it, because she failed to understand the concept of the honour due to a king (Abramsky, Shu 1980: 118 n. 10).

20. Before the dialogue between Michal and David it is stated as follows, 'And Michal the daughter of Saul went out and greeted David and said'. LXX adds 'and blessed him' before 'and she said'. Apparently these words were added by the translator without justification to create a parallelism with 'and David returned to bless his house' in the first half of v. 20. Contrary to McCarter (1984) who maintains that this should be read according to LXX and that these words were deleted in the MT because of 'and she said' which follow them.

4. The Language of Reprimand

155

How honourable was the king of Israel today (v. 20)—Michal's words here are demonstratively ironic in that there is an antonymic relationship between the literal and the metaphoric meaning of the remarks. Michal's intention is clearly to indicate that David has become contemptible and a source of disgrace (cf. Bar-Efrat 1980: 21). Her comments are sarcastic and reflect a blend of tension in both her personal and political relationship. She addresses David in the third person21 as king of Israel, not out of respect or awe for the glory of his majesty, but from a feeling of rage and a desire to hurt him as a man, who is not cognizant, in Michal's opinion, of how to deport himself as a king. The commencement of her remarks, 'how honourable', is appropriate to her intentions. I am aware that ' what ' before a verb indicates 22 mockery and contempt in many instances. The interpretation here is as follows: what great honour he must have received from all those who witnessed his actions, and it is written in 'the perfect tense of the Niph'al which is indicated by the fact that it is vocalized by a patach, and she speaks to him mockingly' (Radak). He imagined that he would be honoured and finds himself scorned. The king of Israel—In v. 16 it is written 'King David', because this is how Michal perceived him. In this verse, it is as she entitles him, possibly because with this designation the contempt and the pain which Michal experiences regarding David's aspirations in establishing a royal house come to the surface. This is clearly revealed now by his establishing of the city of David as the place in which the Ark will reside, as the heir to her father's throne. Arguably, it is revealed because she is thinking of her father's house when she uses this appellation to describe him and apparently not because she is truly concerned by his royal honour. This designation is most appropriate, in the sarcastic sense, to her title, 'daughter of Saul', in that the daughter of the king, who has fallen in battle, speaks here, at a time when a king, who is not from her father's line, is ascending the throne. The bitter irony in the use of this title in what she says acquires increased validity, if we 21. 'who uncovered himself and not 'you uncovered yourself. She does not make use of the second person, in contrast to what David says: before your father thou hast spoken. Cf. Alter (1991: 72); Miller (1995: 158). 22. 'O inhabitant of Lebanon ... how pitiable should thou be when pangs come upon thee' (Jer. 22.23). 'How hast thou helped him who is without power? How hast thou saved the arm that has no strength?' Job 26.2-3. Cf. Gesenius (1960: 471) par. 148b.

156

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

recall that this is in fact the first time that David is given the title 'the king of Israel' by somebody (Gelender 1983: 216. Cf. Alter 1991: 71). Possibly she addresses him in this way because as the daughter of a king she is aware of how a king must behave, in contrast to David, who behaves in a way which is not befitting a king (Brueggemann 1990). In that he uncovered himself today in the eyes of the handmaids of his servants—The contempt displayed towards the king becomes apparent in the phrase 'the handmaids of his servants ' (Gen. 9.25), in so far as these are the most inferior amongst the handmaids, and it is a phrase which denotes considerable disgrace. His conduct as one of the people is not in accord with her wish. She desires to see an external display by him of distinction, because he is king of Israel and in this way he would perpetuate the way in which her father Saul behaved. As one of the low fellows shamelessly uncovers himself23—Michal repeats the verbal radical in the niphal form, three times in her remarks, once in the perfect tense and twice as the absolute infinitive. In LXX, however, the word 'uncovers' is deleted, but it seems that the MT is correct. A similar form is encountered in 1 Sam. 2.27 'did I not appear' but we do not find that the verbal noun is reinforced by an infinitive, and perhaps this version comprises (Segal 1964) two different forms of the infinitive of the niphal conjugation joined one to another in the middle of a sentence without any syntactical co-ordination between the two (Talmon 1960: 174). Radak states as follows: both of them are infinitive forms of the Niph'al conjugation, the one is regular as in 'David earnestly asked' (1 Sam. 20.6, 28; Gen. 31.30; Judg. 11.25 as well), and one is the Niph'al form of the irregular class of defective Pe Nun verbs. And the twofold repetition of the infinitive is as a result of his repeatedly uncovering himself in play.

Apparently the twofold repetition for emphasis appears in two forms: the regular infinitive ('uncovers' with inflections and the absolute infinitive, as in Aramaic and as in 'and the letters were sent by couriers' (Est. 3.13), or possibly it denotes progressive 23. The opinion of Tur-Sinai (1965) does not seem acceptable, that this represents a scribal emendation: that 'uncovered' was originally 'despised ', i.e. 'How glorious ... who has made himself despised in the eyes of. Neither is Ehrlich's opinion (1900) acceptable when he maintains that 'uncover ' is the plural of 'uncovers and is the construct state attached to 'one of the base fellows', and the one who uncovers is an insolent woman.

4. The Language of Reprimand

157

action. But there is, without doubt, an irregular use of the infinitive forms of the niphal here, but this should not be considered as a correction of the erroneous repetition of a form of the verb 'uncover (Gesenius 1960: 213). Within this doubling of the verb, Michal accuses David of being guilty of disgracefully uncovering himself before the handmaidens. And because of this irreverent dancing (cf. Isa. 47.3: 'thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen'),24 she presents David as someone who enjoys exposing himself in public. The previous mention of the fact that he was dressed in a short 'linen vest' and this threefold repetition contributes to the emphasis on the verb 'uncovers and to its meaning in plain language—indecorous exposure (Brenner 1985: 102; Alter 1988: 143-44). It stresses that this situation has not escaped the 'hungry' eyes of the handmaidens, an emphasis that gives rise to suspicion that behind her overt critical remarks concerning the lack of honour arising from his behaviour lay a considerable degree of jealousy in that she accuses him of a lack of sexual modesty. The clarity with which Michal expresses this accusation does not actually depend on the use of the radical 'uncover ', but rather on the circumstantial and literal context of its use (Brenner 1985: 102; Alter 1988: 143-44). If this opinion is acceptable, the verb 'play reinforces this perception, in that this verb has erotic overtones in Semitic languages.25 As one of the low fellows—In LXX we find the words 'the dancers'. Many of the commentators accept this reading (see the note in Orlinsky 1946: 25). The purpose of the translator, or of the Hebrew version that preceded him, is to minimize the improper language employed. The parallelism of the words 'I will be lightly esteemed' and the phrase 'low fellows' (and 'reckless', Judg. 9.4, 11.3), applied to people who are lightly esteemed, does not support the LXX version. On the contrary, the content parallel is nullified.26 The phrase 'one of the low 24. Our sages expounded as follows: 'She said to him: the reign of the house of my father was more pleasant than yours. Far be it from them not to have seen each other with a part of his hand or ankle uncovered, but all of them are more respected than you' (y. Suk. 5.4). 25. The verb'play occurs in this chapter vv. 5, 21. Cf. Huizinga 1966: 75. 26. S. Lieberman (1991: 25) maintains that the translator of LXX did not read 'the dancers' but paraphrased the word 'base by using the word 'dancer' (eiq TCOV opxovueviov). This fits in with what is stated by a sage in the third century CE:

158

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

fellows' is a shameful appellation, which means 'lightly esteemed and reckless' (2 Chron. 13.7), lacking everything. Closer to my concerns is that written in the book of Judges: 'and with which Abimelech hired lightly esteemed and reckless persons' (Judg. 9.4). Michal compares David to low fellows divested of all belongings and driven out of their dwellings. Michal's remarks are infused with anger because David has trodden the honour due to royalty underfoot. Her words reverberate with severe criticism, interspersed with sorrow, insult and bitter mockery. It is abundantly clear that David cannot accept these harsh comments in silence. His response is of great significance, not only from the point of view of their content but also because of the fact that prior to this we have not found that he has spoken to Michal even in connection with the story that she fabricated for her father (1 Sam. 19.17). There he reacts with an action only and merely submits to her request. Here he responds. The significance of his response is clearer than any other in biblical narrative, in which dialogue is the basis of the plot and propels the action forward. And David said to Michal, 'It was before the Lord who chose me before your father, and before all his house' (v. 21)—Even the title 'his wife' is not used here (I have already dwelt on the significance of the other titles) because after these harsh words she was not deserving of being called his wife.27 Possibly they are mentioned here by their names only, with neither title nor honour, to indicate David's keenness to reply to her quickly. before the Lord — In LXX VV we find: before the Lord [I shall dance, blessed be the Lord] who In LXX LV we find:

before the Lord [I shall dance as the Lord liveth] who in the Talmud, Sank. 2.4, 20.2. What are base fellows Rav Abba bar Kahana said: 'the most base of fellows are the dancers' (6p%t|aTT|<;). According to Orlinsky (1946: 26) the word 'dancers was the original word and 'base fellows in the MT was a later error of LXX. In his opinion, 'base ' with the meaning 'base fellows does not occur in the Bible, but occurs only as the two-word phrase 'base people . But the expression 'follows after base people (Prov. 12.11, 28.19) contradicts his opinion. 27. There are those who maintain that Michal did not give birth because David did not have relations with her (thus e.g. Alter 1991: 144-45) after this conversation in which she reprimanded him.

4. The Language of Reprimand

159

This is how many of the modern scholars understand its meaning.28 In their opinion these words have been deleted from the MT because of the equivalence of the words 'the Lord ... the Lord'. But there is no place here for either a blessing to the Lord or an oath in the name of the Lord (Segal 1964). There are those who maintain that a verb has been deleted from the beginning of the verse (Driver 1960: 273; Carlson 1964: 91), but it would seem that Radak is correct in saying that we encounter here an abbreviated form of language: 'I danced and leapt before the Lord because he has honoured me and chosen me.' The parallelism between the commencement of the verse and its conclusion reinforces the MT.29 Porter (1954: 165) also rejects the MT, but maintains that the addendum in LXX is from a later period. In his opinion the verse started with the following words 'I have uncovered myself before the Lord' and concludes with 'over Israel' without 'will I play before the Lord'. This, however, is not acceptable in that the parallelism is nullified, and there is no support for it, either in the MT or in LXX. David periodically replies to Michal's remarks in the language that she herself uses. She speaks ironically, and he responds to her with irony. The emotion that he feels becomes obvious from the repetition (at the commencement and at its conclusion)30 of the words before the Lord. He begins and ends with the phrase 'before the Lord' indicating that his sole purpose is to sanctify God's name, and consequently he gives scant attention to the crowds, who gaze at him, and he is not embarrassed. Possibly it emphasizes that his responsibility is to the Lord and therefore Michal should not think that he speaks from personal anger. The phrase 'before the Lord' is repeated a number of times in this chapter (and in fact links its parts) as a key phrase in vv. 5, 14, 16, 17, 21. The expression is explained in another verse in the chapter: 'and Ahjo went before the Ark' (v. 4) (cf. v. 5!). This relationship is not restricted to this chapter only (Carlson 1980: 73). It is encountered in other sections of the text as well, in the song of the Ark (Num. 10.35) as well as with the episode of the awe which descends upon the Philistine encampment (1 Sam. 4.6-7) with the advent of the Ark. David 28. Orlinsky 1946: 26; Criisemann 1980: 223; McCarter 1984. 29. Criisemann's opinion (1980) is not acceptable in that he perceives in the expression 'before the Lord' a doubling of the original text. 30. Attention should be given to the following verse which commences with the words 'I will be lightly esteemed ' and concludes with its antonymn 'I shall be honoured

160

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

stresses, therefore, that all his actions are performed in front of the Ark of the Lord and they are not to be interpreted as private dancing and playing with the handmaidens. There is irony in the words his house. The negative reaction to, or the lack of understanding of, his actions do not emanate merely from 'the members of his house' but from those within it who represent the house of Saul, and this is made clear in his answer to Michal: 'who chose me before your father and before all his house' (Gelender 1983: 27). This fact is encountered in the repetition of the words his house in vv. 11, 19, 20, 7.1. In this chapter house is linked with blessing (vv. 11, 12, 20). David bestows a blessing on the people (v. 18) subsequent to which he goes to bless his house (v. 20), and this is when Michal goes out and hurls insults at him. In David's reply, when he mentions that he has been chosen 'before your father and before all his house', there is a degree of contrast between Saul's house and his house, the house of David. This becomes clear at the beginning of the following section, where David dwells tranquilly in his house, while the Lord delivers him from his enemies round about, and also from Michal,31 of whom we have not heard again.32 This sentence is separated (the fourth element in the pattern) from the sentence prior to it, which is situated at the climax of the pattern, in that I find a clear distinction between the two sentences: a choice connected (in the past—'he chose') to a preference for David over the house of Saul her father, in contrast to his appointment ('to appoint'—future) as 'a prince ' or a 'leader' over the people of Israel. To appoint me prince over the people of the Lord, over Israel— Michal makes the following cynical comment to David, 'How honourable was the king of Israel today'. David maintains that he is only a prince over the people of the Lord, over Israel. What is the significance of the change from the term 'king ' to the term 'prince'?33 The 31. It would seem that David had repaid the house of Saul twice: with property — Then the King called to Ziva, Saul's servant and said to him, "I have given to thy master's son all that belonged to Saul and to all his house"' (2 Sam. 9.9), 'Behold I have given you all that is Mephibosheth's' (16.4), and: Thou and Ziba shall divide the estate' (19.30); and spiritually — 'And the Gibeonites said to him: "we will have no silver or gold of Saul's nor of his house"'. But in the following 'his house' is deleted: 2 Sam. 21.4, 8-9. 32. In 2 Sam. 21.8 which apparently contradicts 6.23, it would seem that a mistake has occurred, but this is not of interest to us (cf. 1 Sam. 18.19). 33. Cf. in Ps. 76.13 the parallel expressions: 'He shall cut off the spirit of

4. The Language of Reprimand

161

word 'prince ' appears in Scripture as another appellation or title for king, for officers, or people of honour, but also for clerks or people placed in charge at various levels of importance.34 The appellation appears both in the books of Samuel and of Kings.35 David responds to Michal, by changing the title 'king' to that of 'prince', but not without reason. By using this appellation he expresses a clear attitude to Saul her father, in whose appointment and designation the words chosen as a prince over Israel (his people)36 are the same as the language used regarding David. I can infer from this that, besides the direct comments 'chose me before your father and before all his house', I find a direct relationship between the title ('your father') and the verb ('to appoint'), which serves to indicate the link between Saul's reign and that of David, that the Lord appointed him, chose him in Saul's stead,37 that is to say: David emphasizes the legality of his rule (cf. Poulssen 1978: 46). I also find in the appellation prince a clear echo of the Lord's promise to David (2 Sam. 5.2; cf. Gunn 1978: 74). Over and above this the joining in this verse 'over the people of the Lord, over Israel' which includes a preposition in separate apposition 'over/e? Israel is found only in the promise in 2 Sam. 5.2 (and in the words of Nathan to David (2 Sam. 7.8). Therefore will I play before the Lord—I have already noted that David concludes with the language with which he commenced— 'before the Lord'—as a result of excessive excitement. But here he adds 'therefore will I play before the Lord'. It is in the future tense and princes, he is terrible to the kings of the earth.' 34. The etymology of the word is not clear; it is usual to associate it with the preposition 'against , the meaning therefore is one who stands opposite or one who stands at the head of. Cf. Liver (1968b: 753). The opinion of Gluck (1963) that the word derives from the word for a shepherd , the shepherd of the nation (pp. 149-50) which he bases on the interchange of gimel and qoph as in 'goblet' and , etc., is not acceptable. 35. This is the case in the books of Isaiah and Jeremiah. In Chronicles, iteration of these expressions occurs. 36. These words are encountered in their entirety only in respect of Saul and David. 37. This opinion is strengthened that in three out of the five kings (Saul being the first), the title 'Prince occurs in the description of the handing over of the reigns of government to the succeeding king: David (2 Sam. 5.2, 6.21); Solomon (1 Kgs 1.35); Jeroboam (1 Kgs 14.7-8).

162

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

has, therefore, an ultimate accent (Radak). And this connects it with the following verse. There are those who think (Keil-Delitsch 1967: 338) that 'therefore shall I play before the Lord' concludes the sentence after the clause 'that... Israel'. What is the meaning of 'therefore shall I play' in this section of the text? David's ritual activities in this chapter are described in four sentences: And David and all the house of Israe

before the Lord

And David leaped3^ about with all his might before the Lord And Michal... saw King David dancing39 and leaping before the Lord and I shall play before the Lord

(v. 5) (v. 14) (v. 16) (v. 21)

Initially David and the people play. In the continuation, from the point of view of the author, David leaps. In Michal's eyes, 'David dances and leaps before the Lord.' And David himself, when speaking to Michal, states: 'and therefore will I play' (LXX reads, 'and therefore shall I play and dance') 'before the Lord'. Does the verb 'I will play' as used by David serve as a summary of the verbs 'dancing and leaping'? (In accordance with Avishur's opinion [1976: 258].) Avishur is of the opinion (1976: 259-61) that 'leap' and 'play' are a verb pair which are synonymic in Ugaritic. And the meaning of 'leap' is to play with one's hands or one's fingers40 (cf. our sages of blessed memory : 'what is the meaning of leap

That he taps his hands one against the

other, claps and says: "God icupioq] is exalted!" ' Num. R. 4.20). And David dances and leaps—dances and plays with his hands and his fingers. There is a connection between the verb 'plays' and 'sport' and 'dancing'. For example, 'this is the Leviathan which thou hast made to play therein' (Ps. 104.26), or '[wisdom] playing always before him, p l a y i t h the Uni41 verse, his earth' (Prov. 8.30). 38. And in 1 Chron. 15.26—'was clothed 39. And in 1 Chron. 15.29—'dancing and playing , despite the fact that the word 'dancing vigorously ' appears in the verses which are not part of the model. But because of the significance of the comparison this verb has been dealt with. 40. Also Gruber (1981: 339) accepts this opinion, while Ahlstrom (1978: 101) is of the opinion that' implies dancing in a circle. 41. In 1 Sam. 18.7 the verb 'plays' occurs in a different variation: 'And the women answered one another as they danced ' (and in v. 6 'and dancing . From the comparison between it becomes possible to understand the phrase 'dancing with them that make merry' in Jer.

4. The Language of Reprimand

163

How, then, is the change in the verbs explained? Apparently, the verb 'play' indicates conventional dancing, expressing joy, and we encounter this when David and the people transport the Ark from the hill towards the City of David. Before the Ark reaches the City of David, the enthusiasm exceeds normal bounds, and the author describes this from an objective point of view (Berlin 1983: 72-73) using the verb 'leaped' ,42 In the eyes of Michal the daughter of Saul, who does not participate in the joy involved in bringing up the Ark, David, playing, dancing and leaping with great intensity appears to lose self-control. She creates a vision which is far more extreme than that of the narrator, and that is why she treats David with contempt. In his reply to Michal, David shows no sign of perceiving his elation before the Lord as something evil. This exultation at the arrival of the Ark is spontaneous and he negates both self and honour in the cause of paying respect to the Ark (Gelender 1983: 216). Therefore he will continue to play before the Lord, as he has done prior to this and as it is described by the narrator in v. 5. As for David himself his gestures and movements are within the bounds of play and do not differ from the play of the rest of the people ('and David and all the house of Israel played before the Lord' [see above]). If David's first remarks, which appeared in v. 21, refer to Michal's words in terms of content, then what follows in v. 22 relates to them in a literal sense. And I will yet be more lightly esteemed than this, holding myself lowly in mine own eyes—'I will be lightly esteemed' (v. 22)43 continues directly from 'I will play before the Lord' in the previous verse, so that in my playing 'I will yet be more lightly esteemed than this'. That is to say: 'I will make myself even more lightly esteemed than this and humble myself in my own eyes' (Rabbi Josef Kara). The Midrash states as follows: 'He said to her: do not think that I have finished playing now and will not continue to do so, by your life, every other joy that will befall me, will be even greater than this. That is why it is written 31.4. Cf. Gruber 1981:345. 42. This verb denotes, it would seem, vigorous dancing with the connotation of intensivity by employing the pilpel (strong active) conjugation of the radical 'to turn around', as in Cf. Gruber 1981: 338. 43. Carlson (1964: 96) finds a link between 'lightly esteemed and the curse with which Shimei cursed David (2 Sam. 16.5). This does not appear to me to be correct.

164

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

"and I will yet be more lightly esteemed than this" ' (Num. R. 4.20). David comprehends the 'honourable' so laden with sarcasm ('How honourable was the king of Israel today') as spoken by Michal very well, and he changes it to 7 will be more lightly esteemed', which is the antithesis of it. If she intends to hold his honour, the honour of the king, in contempt, he responds to her by saying 'and I will yet be more lightly esteemed than this'. These two radicals honour \ —esteem lightly >44 are etymologically antithetical, and are presented as word pairs in parallel a number of times in Scripture: 1 Sam. 2.30; 1 Kgs 12.10; Isa. 8.23, 23.9, 49.5-6—'and he said is it lightly esteemed for you to be a servant unto me'. It would seem that the final section of the text (Isa. 49.6) constitutes a linguistic and content parallel to this portion of the text, containing the preposition mem as is the case in this section of the text.45 An additional parallelism (albeit between the radical which is related to occurs in Isa. 3.5:'the child shall behave himself proudly against the elder and the base against the honourable'. This parallelism is corroborated by David's comments to Saul's servants who have come to influence him to wed into the king's household, that is, to take Michal to wife: 'And David said: "Seems it to you a light thing to be a king's son-in-law, seeing that I am a poor man and insignificant (1 Sam. 18.23). David employs a verb based on the radical in the niphal conjunction with reference to Michal, at the beginning of his career, when he refuses (temporarily) to marry Michal, as he does at the end of their relationship, in his remarks to Michal. The infrequency of this radical in the niphal conjugation46 reinforces my opinion, that this verb creates a connection between the narratives.

44. Both these verbs are in the niphal conjugation. Attention should be given to the multiplicity of the verbs in this conjugation in the conversation between Michal and David: 'was honoured', 'was uncovered', 'uncover', 'uncovered', 'I will be slightly esteemed', and 'shall I be had in honour'— Six verbs out of eleven! 45. The parallels with Isa. 53.6 and Ezek. 8.17, 'Is it not enough for the house of Judah that they commit the abominations authenticates the MT and not the LXX which changes the preposition as well ('and I have uncovered myself like this'. Cf. De Boer for this (1956: 97-99). 46. The radical in the niphal conjugation occurs 11 times in Scripture, 5 of them in the Former Prophets. Two of these link this section of the text.

4. The Language of Reprimand

165

/ will be lightly esteemed is stated by David at the beginning of the verse and antithetically in parallel at the conclusion of this verse—I be had in honour It can be inferred from this that the words 'I will be lightly esteemed ' as spoken by David are meant to allude to the beginning of Michal's comments and to the conclusion of David's. But apparently the words 'I will be lightly esteemed are parallel and relate to Michal's utterances in additional ways in that they constitute a play on words as well as a substitution of letters: Michal in her speech emphasizes three words based on the radical uncover in the niphal construction; he uncovered, shamelessly uncovers himself —David changes one letter and replies to her with almost the same words as she has used, / will be lightly esteemed . Employing the verbs 'uncover' and 'be esteemed' reflects a clear play on words through the medium of the exchange of two velar plosives, gimmel-kuf i, a 47 substitution which is well known in Scripture. LXX translates with the Greek equivalent of the English 'I will be uncovered' for 'I will be lightly esteemed' , as in v. 20. The preposition also changes from 'I will uncover myself like this' (oihcoq) in place of 'I will be more lightly esteemed than this'. This does not seem to me to be correct (Carlson 1964: 92) because of the parallelism 'holding myself lowly', and also because of the antithetical parallelism at the conclusion of this verse—'shall I be had in honour'. Holding myself lowly in my own eyes—If Michal has accused him of uncovering himself like one of the low fellows then David maintains that he will make himself even more lowly in the future than he has done in the past. And perhaps 'more than I have been lightly esteemed by myself I will be lightly esteemed and made lowly in my eyes before the Creator, because one does not stand before him with pride and honour, but in humility and lowliness' (Rabbi Isaiah Mitrani). There is no necessity to change the text to read 'and I was lowly in his eyes' (in the eyes of the Lord)—this represents an instance of haplography of the waw—in my own eyes and in my opinion, and of the maidservants (McCarter 1984). That is to say: David stresses his submission to the Lord, in that he means, that in his eyes he is lowly and not in the eyes of the Lord. The moderns (thus Ehrlich 1900) as 47. The Hebrew words for'goblet' (Isa. 51.17, 22) and for'husk' (Num. 6.4). See Koehler-Baumgartner (1953: 250), as well as Gesenius (1949: 698).

166

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

well as Porter (1954: 166) interpret in accordance with LXX: even if I am lowly in your eyes—I will be honoured in the eyes of the maidservants. But if this is so, the word with should be without the waw conjunctive (Segal 1964). It would seem that the MT is valid, in that it retains the words lin my eyes' in contrast to Michal's words 'in the eyes of the handmaids of his servants' (v. 20). The parallelism in the pivot pattern reinforces this opinion. And of the maidservants of whom thou hast spoken, of them shall I be had in honour—David alludes directly here to Michal's 'of whom thou hast spoken'. But David does not quote her comments in their entirety in that she says disdainfully, 'the handmaids of his servants', and David simply says 'maidservants', deleting the words 'his servants'.48 David causes Michal's contention, that he has exposed himself to other women, to come full circle by maintaining emphatically that these maidservants will respect him for this very behaviour which seems so base in his wife's eyes (Alter 1988: 144), as Rashi contends 'they do not scorn me but I am esteemed in their eyes'. What is significant here is David's consideration for the maidservants in contrast to Michal's supercilious attitude towards them. The maidservants have greater respect and esteem for the Lord than does Michal. David's outlook is essentially different from that of Michal and this is illustrated by referring to a quarrel in another place in the Scriptures (Gen. 16.4). Sarah demands that Abraham drives out her maidservant. Being lightly esteemed in the eyes of the maidservants is considered the epitome of disgrace. David's response therefore represents his abundant readiness to make himself lowly before the Lord, even in front of the maidservants. David concludes his comments with the words 7 will be had in honour' that is in antithetical parallel to 7 will be lightly esteemed' at the beginning of the verse, and at the commencement of Michal's utterance 'how honourable was'. Just as she asks this sarcastically, so he replies cynically. He concludes with the language with which she commences. This closes the circle of the discourse.

48. Carlson (1964: 96), links this 'honour' to the birth of David's son and this is stressed by the Deuteronomistic author, who terms the crown of David 'the seat of honour' (1 Sam. 2.8). In contrast it is given expression thus, that the Lord bestows 'honour' on Solomon (1 Kgs 3.13). This link between the two sections of the text does not appear to me to be in any way correct.

4. The Language of Reprimand

167

While the author does not reveal to us where his sympathy lies,49 whether with David, whom the Lord has chosen, or with Michal who loved David and who saved him and who now, and possibly even prior to this, is neglected by him. But the interruption of the dialogue with David's words is in itself an implicit commentary. David is given the benefit of the final word, simply because power is vested in him, as he is at pains to indicate to Michal. Directly after this the announcement that Michal 'did not have ... a child until ... her death' appears (v. 23), giving the impression that her childlessness was a punishment for her behaviour. In this pivot pattern we find the conversation between Michal and David. The structure is created by the accord which exists between David's reply to Michal's rash pronouncements. David concludes with that with which Michal commences (the radical honours i: if Michal speaks to him sarcastically 'how honourable was', David responds to her both seriously and cynically, 'and of the maidservants of whom thou hast spoken, of them / shall be had in honour'1. Both these verbs are in the niphal conjugation Because she chooses to scorn the maidservants, she calls them handmaids of his servants. David answers her by speaking positively of the maidservants and even mentions 'm my eyes' as opposed to 'in the eyes of.. I will be lightly esteemed serves as a play on words, in contrast to uncovers, shamelessly, uncovers himself

From the

content point of view these words are connected with the words 'low fellows'. They are in contrast to the word 'honoured' contained in Michal's speech and to the words 'I shall be had in honour' at the conclusion of David's speech. The radicals (curse) and (honour), occur frequently in Scripture as verbs as well as nouns indicating antithesis. David emphasizes the expression 'before the Lord' on two occasions in his desire to indicate that his playing and his uncovering himself are actions performed before the Lord, and it is before the Lord that he must make himself lowly and not be boastful. At the centre we encounter David's comments to Michal the daughter of Saul because the Lord has chosen him as 'prince over the people of the Lord, over

Israel' (v. 21). It is clear that the story concerning the bringing up of the Ark does not conclude with a matter of personal significance, nor with the 49. Alter 1988: 144.

168

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

problem of the royal inheritance as some researchers contend (thus Rost 1926: 105-107), but with a concern of national proportions: David's rule over Israel and his being chosen by the Lord.

This emerges from the pivot of the structure. At the climax of the episode David states that God has appointed him as prince over the people of Israel, which indicates that this is the point of greatest gravity in his curt reply to Michal, daughter of Saul, the previous king. It would seem, therefore, that besides the 'discussion' on 'irreverent playing' by David, the reader discerns in this episode an additional dimension to the conflict between the house of Saul and the victorious house of David (2 Sam. 3.1). David is chosen above Saul to become 'the prince over the people of the Lord, over Israel'. It is no wonder then that these words emanate from David's mouth at the beginning of his reign, in reaction to Michal, the daughter of the previous king ('the daughter of Saul'), and constitute the climax of this structure's pivot. 4. 'And a Certain Man Saw It and Told Joab' (2 Samuel 18.10-11a) A

And a certain man saw it and told Joab and said X Behold I saw Absalom hanging in the oak tree B' And Joab said to the man who told him A' And, behold, thou sawest him and why didst thou not smite him there to the ground

(v. 10)

B

(v. 11)

This pivot pattern includes the comments of the narrator (v. lOa), the words of a certain man from amongst David's servants and soldiers (v. lOb), and the question cum assertion of Joab (v. lla) (actually, Joab's words are a continuation50 and the man answers him with words designed to goad him [vv. 12-13]) during the war between David's army and the army of Absalom who is rebelling against his father. But these words (v. 14), the continuation of a dialogue, are not incorporated in this structure. It seems to me that the structure includes only vv. 10lla and not vv. llb-14a, because the latter are devoted to the events which took place (Absalom hanging in the oak tree [v. 9]), or that 50. This gives rise to a problem in that the structure is not logically congruent with this passage. For this and for other examples see the section The Limits of the patterns' in the concluding chapter (7).

4. The Language of Reprimand

169

which will take place (the smiting of Absalom (vv. 14-15]), and therein their significance, while vv. lib-14 concern themselves with proposed incidents that have not taken nor will take place because of the man's loyalty to the king. And a certain man saw it (v. 10)—The episode opens with the comments of the narrator regarding the testimony of a certain man, an anonymous soldier, a servant of David (mentioned in v. 5), who is not even called by name.51 The expression 'a certain' occurs in Scripture52 as an alternative term for anonymous, when the narrator does not perceive the name as being worthy of mention (or where he simply is not acquainted with the name). The opening formula 'and told Joab and

said' is relatively extended (as opposed to 'and he said to ...'):, and this occurs in Scripture.53 Apparently in all the sections of the text in which it does occur it signifies an important and sometimes dramatic announcement. That is the case here, despite the cantillation 'etnachta beneath the words 'to Joab', from which I infer a type of generalization 'and told', followed by a specification 'and said'.54 51. The word 'man' occurs on its own in Qumran Cave 4. This is not required as the phrase 'a (one) man' appears frequently in Scripture. 52. Cf. Gen. 42.11, 13; 1 Kgs 20.25; Dan. 10.5: 'Such and such a one'—Ruth 4.1. 53. Gen. 26.32, 47.1, 48.2; Judg. 13.10, 14.2, 16.17; 2 Sam. 11.5, 22, 24.13; Ruth 2.19, 3.16. 54. From amongst the sections of the text in which this pattern occurs, 'And he told ... and he said', it would seem that the following are closest to the passages under consideration: And he saw a woman, And he came up and he told his father and mother and he said; I have seen a woman (Judg. 14.12). And the woman made haste and told her husband and said: Behold the man has appeared to me (Judg. 13.10). And a certain man saw it and told Joab and said: Behold I saw Absalom. (This section of the text) In each of the above examples the interlocutor relates what has become known to him a short time before (with the exception of Judg. 16.17). In the examples, the details of which are given above, the speaker sees whatever he sees and goes to tell of this to somebody else, and nothing interposes (with the exception of Na'aman) between 'and he told...and he said' in order to emphasize whatever is said. In the second example we find reported speech between 'and he told' and 'and he said', as in the example of 2 Sam. 11.22: 'So the messenger went and came and told David all that Joab had sent him for, and said', etc. In the words of Manoach's wife we

170

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

It would seem that there is no discussion because the author extends the opening formula to the words of Joab: And Joab said to the man who told him,

and told Joab

in order to create a parallel to the opening formula before the words of the man:

and said

In so far that it is clear that the narrator was satisfied with a somewhat shorter formula (and might well have shortened both of them), as for example 'and he said' or 'and Joab said', it was clear according to his words who the speaker was and to whom he spoke, after the narrator had presented the pair of speakers prior to this. The chiastic parallel also indicates this, as does the parallel in the pivot structure which reinforces my hypothesis. The narrator, therefore, is desirous of creating a parallel between the opening formulae, and thereby giving equal stress to both speakers, their standpoints and their functions at this moment when Absalom remains hanging in the oak tree. This in its turn creates a pivot structure. The explanation that the extended formula is intended to hint at Joab's hesitations before replying to the man is less favoured by me. The expression the man who told him ('who told' [lit.'the teller'] as a

noun plus the definite article) is encountered infrequently in Scripture.55 The one who tells is, in all sections of the text, connected with an announcement of death, either before or after his coming (as we find here). In close proximity to this section of the text is the following verse, and David said to the youth who told him (2 Sam. 1.5, 13) in contrast to our verse: and Joab said to the man who told him

The leader makes an inquiry in the wake of matters divulged to him by the youth or the man. David slays the youth who tells him that he struck Saul down. Here, however, Joab kills Absalom.

find a formulae which includes the word 'behold' (which serves to emphasize what is said) in the presentation of her utterances, as we find what the man says. There is a significant amount of excitement involved in the message that they convey. 55. In 2 Samuel exclusively, and always in connection with David: 1.5, 6, 13; 4.10; 15.13; 18.11.

4. The Language of Reprimand

171

At the climax of the structure we find the man's utterance: Behold I saw Absalom hanging in the oak tree. There is a twofold relationship within these words: in 'and a certain man saw it', stated in brief in order not to reiterate the details of what he saw, and in the narration of the deed by the narrator (v. 9). The man is succinct in what he says when he relates what he saw; he confines himself to a sentence with six words in which the significant and principal information is contained in three words (in the original Hebrew text): 'Absalom hanging56 in the oak tree' (the oak is mentioned four times in this passage: 2 Sam. 18.914). Possibly he did not see more of this, because he was not there when the mule passed underneath the tree. But it would seem that the man curtailed what he said in order to convey the principal fact to the commander of the army, as well as the outcome of Absalom being entangled in the thicket. He certainly felt the need to convey the information hurriedly and he therefore deletes all the details which are not of significance to Joab. This incident is also notable because in the formula 'and he saw ... and he told ... and he said' we do not encounter a verb which indicates his arrival before Joab (and it is obvious that Joab was not next to him, when Absalom was caught in the oak tree), as we find in other sections of the text: 'and you sent', 'and he went', 'and he came', etc. The narrator omits the description of the man's arrival before Joab, in order to illustrate the speed of his actions. The man's remarks which comprise the climax of the pivot pattern, open with the word behold , which introduces many sentences in the Scriptures, and which does not constitute a part of these sentences, particularly when spoken by the narrator (Sternberg 1982: 93-97). The majority of the verses containing '(and) behold' occurs after a verb concerning eyewitness accounts (cf. Kogut 1987: 252). The function here of this phrase is to emphasize (in direct speech) the fact which follows, and to draw the attention of the listener, in this case Joab (cf. Berlin 1983: 95) and to allude to the immediate present, at the actual moment when it is spoken about.57 The addition of and behold brings the past close to the 56. Hanging is mentioned in the Bible in the narrative of Haman and his sons (Est. 8.7), the baker (Gen. 40.19), etc. But here accidental hanging in the foliage of a tree and not as a result of the verdict of the court is being discussed. This accounts for the difference in the language between 'to be hanged from the tree and 'hanging in the oak tree ... as it appears in this section of the text. 57. Gesenius 1960: par. 116p, par. 147b; Ben David 1967: 550-52. Cf. additional examples: 2 Sam. 19.10; Job 16.19; etc.

172

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

present moment: the fact actually takes place at the time of the conversation, in view of the listener (Ben David 1967: 552). With this 'behold' we have a covert penetration into the soul (Sternberg 1982: 102). In this structure which deviates from the form of other structures, it is impossible to arrive at an understanding of its contribution after examining the climax only, without looking at what is stated at the conclusion of the structure, because the final section of the pattern is connected by the verb you saw to its commencement, and he saw. But in this pattern the conclusion is linked not only with the introduction, but also with the centre of the structure, to its climax.58 In addition to this, the link with the climax is closer than that with the opening. That is because of the interlocutors in the episode, as I have already noted. The first two elements in the structure emanate from the narrator. The third element—the climax—from the man. The fourth element—from the author. The fifth element expresses Joab's response to the comments made by the man, and the opening formula is a parallelism, as mentioned, situated before their utterances. There is a clear connection between their comments. Joab's remarks are linked and related to those of the man, to a greater degree than they are connected with the words of the narrator ('and he saw'-'I saw'). The reason for this is clear, Joab is responding to him and therefore commences with a form similar to that used by the man: Behold I saw—Absalom hanging in the oak tree And, behold, thou sawest him, and why didst thou not strike him there to the ground?

The function of the words 'and behold' in Joab's statement differs from that of the man's utterance. First, possibly because he commences with a quotation from what the man says (with an alteration necessitated by the change in person).59 Secondly, the sentence differs in that it is a complex sentence, where the subordinate clause (of result) constitutes a question: and behold thou sawest him and why didst thou not smite him there to the ground?601 have encountered a version like this, spoken by 58. I can testify to the existence of two further examples of this particular model. See Chapter 7, section 6. 59. There are many examples of this. See Klaus 1986: 153ff. 60. Attention should be given to the expression 'strike him to the ground', which appears once again in what Abner says: 'Why should I strike thee to the ground' (2 Sam. 2.22).

4. The Language of Reprimand

173

Joab in reprimanding David, Behold Abner came to thee

Why is it that thou hast sent him away and he is quite gone? (2 Sam. 3.24),

as well as Jonathan's remarks to David, behold, my father will do nothing either great or small and why should my father hide this from me? (1 Sam. 20.2)

'And behold' is placed here in order to emphasize the question which follows it.61 In the nature of 'that the deed was done and Joab asks him. He does not designate it as a deed already done, but to ask a question from it' (Ehrlich [1900] to 2 Sam. 3.24). And unlike in the words of the introduction spoken by the man, we do not have here a question of tense but of emphasis.62 'Behold'—to indicate an opportunity that has presented itself before this (McCarthy 1980: 335): as you saw him, you should have smitten him to the ground.63 By his statement to the man Joab displays a lack of personal emotion and feeling towards Absalom and the king, who cautioned the people saying 'Deal gently for my sake with the young man' (2 Sam. 18.5). Accordingly we encounter here a contention rather than merely a (rhetorical) question, that he (the man) had been presented with an opportunity which he did not exploit. Joab makes a conscious protest here, against the instruction issued by the king, as he had made a direct protest against his (the king's) sending away of Abner in peace (2 Sam. 3.24-25). In these pronouncements the officer's displeasure at his servant's actions clearly becomes more acute (Polak 1983: 218-19). Ostensibly this reinforces Joab's culpability. Joab is situated here in opposition to the man, a secondary character in the drama, a fact that increases Joab's guilt. He reproaches his soldier, because he (the soldier) has not killed the son of the king, which would have been contrary to the king's orders, and he (Joab) then proceeds to kill Absalom with his own hands (v. 14).

61. Cf. 'But, behold, if we go, what shall we bring the man?' (1 Sam. 9.7). 62. Gesenius's opinion is not acceptable (1960: 497 n. 1) because the meaning of the Hebrew word here is 'that'. 63. The author of Mez. Z. here explains it as a reprimand, as if to say: what use is a reason, why didn't you kill him?

174

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

The narrator's comments and the man's conversation with Joab focus considerable attention on what he saw (cf. Fokkelman 1981: 243). This is presented at the beginning of the structure, at its climax, and at its conclusion. Attention should be given to the progression: At the commencement the words 'and he saw' appear, spoken by the narrator, without either a direct or an indirect object, the reason for this being that the reader has read (v. 9) about the incidents which the man witnessed, prior to this, and there is therefore no purpose in reiterating them. At the climax, at the core of the structure is a direct quotation from what the man says (and the direct object constitutes the essence of his eye witness account): / saw Absalom hanging in the oak tree.

Then at the conclusion is Joab's question based on what the man reported that he had seen, with the addition of the action which was not implemented: And, behold, thou sawest him and why didst thou not smite him there to the ground?

At the centre, in the second and the fourth elements, there are formulaic introductions situated before the speech delivered by the man and before Joab's utterances, which relate one to the other, with the utmost clarity. The man's words, Behold I saw Absalom hanging in the oak tree, occur at the centre of the structure. The rebellious son of the king hangs, powerless, 'between heaven and earth,' but the man does not touch him because of the warning issued by the king. Apparently this fact is stated at the climax of the pattern in order to stress (by means of antithesis) Joab's inflexibility and to demonstrate his complete disregard for the instruction of the king. Absalom hangs powerless, but the man does not kill him—a man like Joab is incapable of letting an incident such as this to pass without comment. Not only does he kill Absalom, but he reprimands the man who tells him and tries to tempt him with money. There is no doubt that within the framework of Joab's guilt regarding the slaying of Abner and Amasa (with guile), the text stresses the killing of the son of the king because of Joab's rigidity and his decision to ignore what the king has ordered. It is for good reason that the narrator does not satisfy himself with the conventional formulaic opening, 'and a certain man saw it and told Joab and he took three darts and thrust

4. The Language of Reprimand

175

them through the heart of Absalom', but extends it in order to stress Joab's inflexibility, cruelty and lack of consideration for the king's request—Joab will act in the way in which he perceives to be correct, even if that does not comply with the wishes of the king. Joab's reaction is in total contrast to that of the man, and the author emphasizes how the actions of a secondary character illuminate the rigidity of the principal character. I have at the centre of the structure the spectacle of Absalom hanging in the oak tree. The man and Joab relate to this fact in complete contrast to one another. The commander of the army prevails because of his position, his unwavering stand and his readiness to disregard the king's instructions. But the man gains the sympathy of the narrator, as well as that of the reader 5. Summary In this chapter I have analysed structures in which I have found statements of reprimand and harsh rebuke aimed at interlocutors. By virtue of the nature of the subject, almost no instances of facts expressed by the narrator occur in these patterns with the exception of 'and a certain man saw' (2 Sam. 18.10) as an introduction to the words spoken by the man to Joab. And this is a conventional formula for statements preceding direct speech ('and he spoke ... and he said'). Despite this the narrator creates parallelisms within his own utterances (in contrast to the other examples of parallelism which are formed by the words of the narrator[s]).64 This is the only chapter in which in all the pivot patterns we find the ideastic climax, but it is interesting that it is only at the climax of one structure (2 Sam. 3.24-25) that we find an actual reprimand (Joab reprimands David), and in only one other structure does a reprimand occur in the last element thereof (2 Sam. 18.10-1 la). David's words are situated at the centre of the pattern (2 Sam. 6.2022), but these are words of reproach and are said ironically, and not actual words of reprimand.

64. The example in the dialogue between Joab and the man is as follows: And he told Joab

And he said

And Joab said to the man who told him (2 Sam. 18.10-11)

176

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Reprimand or reproval constitutes the pivot pattern in its entirety in two further instances (2 Sam. 3.24-25; 2 Sam. 6.20-22). But in the dialogue between the man and Joab, the reprimand is situated in the final element only, in that, prior to this, the formulaic openings and the narrative concerning the man occur. As I have mentioned, we find structures here in which the one reprimanded reacts, and in one instance the response of the person reprimanded is absent entirely. There are structures in which we encounter two interlocutors (2 Sam. 6.22; 18.11) and in these we discover that the speaker (David, Joab) answers his interlocutor using the other's language. This is an accepted procedure in Scripture, used either to chide (Job and his colleagues, Moses and Korah, Dathan and Abiram [Num. 16]) or to draw different conclusions but expressed in the language of the speaker prior to him (cf. Klaus 1986). It is possible that in the structure of 2 Sam. 3.24-25, in which one speaker appears (Joab) the narrator's attention (as well as the reader's) is focused on his words alone in that the caustic words of reprimand are directed at King David! Therefore it stands out in contrast to David's silence, and concentration is focused on Joab alone. In the two structures in which the word 'behold'65 serves to present a fact, by which an action is explained, with the addition of an interrogative ('why', 'wherefore'i, Joab reprimands David, who has sent his adversary away in peace, as well as the man who did not kill Absalom. As well, in the verses which follow the verses in the pattern, Joab the murderer of Abner and Absalom is described. Possibly therefore the narrator arouses the attention of the reader to the anticipated slaying, by means of the language of reprimand expressed in a pivot pattern for emphasis. It becomes clear that reprimands do not only occur as spoken by the powerful to the unempowered. Michal's and Joab's comments to David are ample proof of this.

65. 'Behold Abner came to thee, why is it thou hast sent him away' (2 Sam. 3.24); 'And behold thou sawst and why didst thou not smite him' (2 Sam. 18.11).

Chapter 5 PATTERNS OF REQUEST, PRAYER AND PROPOSAL

1. Introduction In this chapter I have included pivot patterns that concern themselves with the words of a speaker who anticipates a favourable response to a request, a prayer and a proposal. Oratorical skills are accepted in Scripture as a means of persuasion in confrontational situations between people and in socio-political debates. This means of expression developed through speeches (for example Hushai's speech [2 Sam. 17.7-14]), in which the speakers use persuasion as a means of action in difficult debate and also in attempts to resolve controversy amicably. I find here, with the exception of Hushai's speech, which is protracted, 'brief addresses' in which there is an attempt on the part of the interlocutor 'to persuade' his auditor, in one way or another, to comply with his wishes, whether these are expressed as a request or a proposal. In the final analysis, the speaker anticipates the implementation of what he seeks or proposes. The orators are at pains to attract and hold the attention of the addressee (the king, the prophet, the Lord) and to stimulate his interest and sympathy in his approach to them. It is no wonder, then, that the chosen literary vehicle is the pivot pattern for the expression of requests and proposals, because by means of iteration in inverted order the one making the request is able to emphasize his wishes, the climax of which is generally at the core of his address. There is a tendency, recognizable in this repetition, by the narrator to minimize elaboration, judgmental pronouncements, and detailed assessment of the characters and their actions. Within these parameters the iterative structure, in this case the pivot pattern, serves as a covert, flexible and effective rhetorical tool (cf. Sternberg 1977: 149). In my analysis I shall examine the patterns in this chapter in order to establish whether the request is situated at the centre of the structure, or

178

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

possibly at the periphery of the pivot, and whether the use of language is characteristic of, or common to, the patterns that concern themselves with persuasion, and thereby attempt to arrive at a better understanding of them. 2. Jonadab Son ofShimeah's Words to King David (2 Samuel 13.32-33)1 And Jonadab, the son of Shimeah David's brother, answered and said: A

(Let not my lord suppose (that they have slain all the young men, the king's sons (for Amnon only is dead: X for by the command of Absalom has this been ordained, from the day that he violated his sister Tamar. A' (Now therefore let not my Lord the king take this thing to his heart saying: (that all the king's sons are dead (for Amnon only is dead.

This pivot pattern consists of a brief speech delivered by Jonadab the son of Shimeah, brother of David, in which he clarifies the truth regarding the murder of Amnon and the reasons why it was committed, to David. In v. 35 we find additional comments by Jonadab. This arises from the fact that the narrator has chosen to describe the synchronized aspects of the events (cf. Talmon 1978: 20-21). Jonadab's conversation with David and the mourning undergone by David and his servants (13.28-38) took place at a time when Absalom and his young men were retreating. The narrator cuts short the account of the murder and the flight in its recounting by Jonadab. The additional remarks appear in v. 35, after the narrator has described the king's sons drawing closer to David's camp in the midst of a large group of people.2 I can infer from this that only the initial comments made by Jonadab are structured in the form of a pivot pattern. A new idea is propounded within these comments, whereas in the additional remarks (v. 35) nothing new is forthcoming. There is merely confirmation of what has 1. Cf.Ridout 1971:44. 2. The picture of the lookout who informs the king (in this case Jonadab) is known from 2 Sam. 18.24-27, 2 Kgs 9.17, 20. In the narrative of the announcement to David (2 Sam. 18), he hears a disturbing rumour and because of his suspicion he understands that it is harsh and tragic. In this passage he hears a serious rumour (30) and Jonadab minimizes the gravity and volunteers to explain without being asked. The messengers are sent to inform and they find the duty extremely onerous.

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

179

been said prior to this, and these comments are not linked to the initial phrases. Jonadab's words are spoken within a framework of mourning by the king and his servants. In v. 31—mourning for all the sons of the king. In v. 36—mourning for Amnon alone.3 Jonadab's comments are situated in the centre4 and they form a connection between the two phrases of mourning in that Jonadab illustrates in words the feelings that are expressed in mourning. He contradicts the rumour that all the king's sons have died. His comments are in direct speech between facts provided by the narrator: vv. 30-31, 36-39 (cf. Bowman 1985: 251). Jonadab's speech propels the action forward and transports the reader and David from mourning for the sons of the king to mourning for Amnon alone. And Jonadab, the son of Shimeah, David's brother answered and said—At the beginning of the chapter he spoke to the king's son, but these verses to the king (his uncle). If he had not advised Amnon he would not have had to console the king. Let not my Lord suppose that they have slain all the young men, the king's sons (v. 32). Jonadab in his wisdom attempts to exploit the difficult psychological situation of the king and his servants, in order to place things in correct perspective for the king. He adopts a cunning method to refute the rumour and to console the king and he achieves this by presenting a direct quotation from what the king himself has said: 'Let not my Lord suppose that they have slain all the young men, the king's sons'. He knows that the report is not correct and is exaggerated, and he uses this knowledge to quash this false rumour that has reached David's ears: 'that the report... Absalom has slain all the kings sons [see 2 Kgs 10.7] and there is not one of them left' (v. 30). There is a significant difference when comparing this with what Jonadab says, in that his intention is to shift the direct responsibility from Absalom as the executor of this deed, and this is expressed by deleting his name 3. It is of interest that these two passages, vv. 31, 36, which describe David's mourning, are structured as brief pivot patterns: a And lifted up their voices and wept b and the king also and all his servants a' wept very bitterly. 4. well.

a Then the king arose, and tore his garments b and lay on the earth a' and all his servants stood by with their clothes rent

They occur at the centre of the episode from the point of view of form as

180

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

and also by the words 'they have slain', the subject of which is indefinite. He softens what he says by omitting the words 'there is not one of them left'. Anyway his intention is to convey an entirely different message to the king. The title 'the king's sons'5 stands in apposition to 'the young men'6 to indicate their close relationship to the king (this is the appellation given to sons in relationship to their father, and this is how the text reads when it refers to the sons of Job as young men , Job 1.16, 19]) because he was aware of the warm and loving relationship which the king had with them. Compare: 'go therefore, bring back the young man Absalom' (2 Sam. 14.21), and, 'Deal gently for my sake with the young man, with Absalom' (2 Sam. 18.5) spoken by David with regard to his son. The verb 'smote' becomes 'they have slain',7 possibly because he was aware that he should not overstate the contrast, and possibly to juxtapose this word with the word 'die (flD)' from the same radical. All this is accompanied by a change in the version of the false report that reached David, in order to contrast it with the truth as it was known by Jonadab the wise: for Amnon only is dead. Despite this denial, it was not known for certain whether Jonadab's comment on Amnon was characterized by scorn, 'only' one son died, or whether he attempted to emphasize the importance of Amnon by the use of the word 'for '8 as it is stressed in the verbal parallelism of his comments (v. 33), and as he emphasizes the role of Absalom in setting this in motion ('for by the command of Absalom'). Whatever 5. Attention should be given that the appellation 'the sons of the king' is repeated seven times in vv. 27-36, because David was anxious about them. 6. Malbim explains as follows that the narrator uses this expression so that David will not think that because they are sons of the king he wanted to destroy all the seed of the royal line. 7. In LXX LV the word 'they died is written, but this does not appear to be correct in that the translator compared it to the textual version in v. 33. In 4QSama it is written: '[ ] the youths all the sons of the k[ing]'. McCarter (1984) is of the opinion that following this version the youths (in v. 29) are Absalom's young men, and therefore it should read 'the young men slew all the king's sons'. But this does not appear correct. See above in the words of David about Absalom. 8. Cf. Bowman (1985: 250) in contrast to McCarter (1984) who contends that Jonadab speaks coldly and apathetically about Amnon. To say that Jonadab justifies the killing of Amnon because he is angry with him is an overstatement, where he could have silenced the issue had he not chased Tamar out. Bar-Efrat, too (1980: 207), is of the opinion that Jonadab's language with reference to Amnon minimizes the enormity of the act.

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

181

the case it would seem that the man who was Amnon's closest friend now has an attitude of relative indifference to his death. In this pivot pattern (cf. also 1 Kgs 13.8-9; 16-17; 22) there is no inversion of the verbal order, and it remains the same after the climax of the pattern, because Jonadab appears in order to 'console' the king with the news that only Amnon, and not all his other sons, has died. It is clear that this detail is bound to come at the end of his remarks, and this in fact represents the verbal order as it is. This notwithstanding, there are certain differences between his words before the climax and those which appear after it. In contrast to 'Let not my Lord suppose' he now states, 'Now therefore let not my Lord, the King, take this thing to his heart saying'. He commences with the words 'now therefore , a conventional opening for the introduction of a new topic, and particularly when this is followed by the drawing of a conclusion. Here the closing of the pericope consists of his opening remarks with specific changes for the purposes of emphasis. His words here, in the second opening, are extended. If Jonadab previously contradicts the quotation from what David has said ('Let not my Lord suppose'), here David is requested not to take this thing to heart, which others say is itself a type of report because it is heard (v. 30), in the nature of: Let the king not say and let him not even give attention to the matter. The phrase 'take not this thing to heart' is similar to the language used by Abigail (1 Sam. 25.25) and to the language used by Absalom to Tamar: 'take not this thing to heart' (2 Sam. 13.20). There is an attempt here to detract from the value of these words, the words of the report, as if they were not important. Apparently there is a clear connection here: Absalom says this to Tamar in connection with her rape by Amnon. Jonadab makes his comments to David about the incident with Absalom (and the rumours connected with it) and Amnon in the wake of the same occurrence of rape. The change in the words in the vocative case, 'my Lord'—'my Lord the King', are explained as a conventional mode of twofold address. Compare: 'Why does my Lord thus pursue ... now therefore I pray thee, let my Lord the King hear' (1 Sam. 26.18-19); 'Let not my Lord impute iniquity unto me ... the day that my Lord the King went out of Jerusalem' (2 Sam. 19.20). Therefore it is not necessary to accept the revision which occurs in LXX and the Peshitta, that reads in v. 32: 'Let not my Lord [the king] suppose [that]'.9 9.

McCarter (1984) maintains that this deletion results from the fact that the

182

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

In contrast to 'they have slain all the young men, the king's sons' Jonadab says now: '—all—the king's sons are dead' . He deletes the 'young men' and changes 'the king's sons' from an object (the particle et introducing [the direct object] 'all the young men') in an indefinite subjective clause ('they have slain') to the subject of the sentence. In any event the verb changes from 'they have slain ' to 'are dead , without identifying the killer, even in indefinite or anonymous form. The last line is identical (if we do not consider the kethib, or the qere: 'for Amnon only is dead'. Possibly, Jonadab attempts to remove the guilt of the murder from Absalom (Ararat 1983: 353). As a wise man he would know how to exploit the king's silence and his failure to react to what he (Jonadab) says. He arrives at the conclusion introduced by 'now therefore', indicating that it is a consequence of the new situation. Amnon has sinned, and he is slain as punishment for his sin. But Absalom is forced against his will to go into exile far from home. At the climax of the pattern we find Jonadab's words relating to the one responsible for the death and its attendant circumstances: for by the command of Absalom has this been ordained, from the day that he violated his sister Tamar (v. 32)—Jonadab, as Amnon's advisor in the matter of Tamar, is the indirect cause of his death and now finds himself in a perplexing situation as a member of the royal retinue (cf. Savran 1988: 157). But from the literary point of view his presence as a secondary character is eminently justifiable. When giving his reasons he points to the improbability of the rumour, that all the king's sons are dead. He is the only one in the entourage that gives no credence to the report that 'Absalom has slain all the king's sons', because he realizes in contrast to the other courtiers and even to David himself 'for by the command of Absalom' the incident took place. His comments are presented to bring home David's lack of understanding of everything concerning the nature of the relationship between his sons10 and to what scribe saw the Hebrew letters and thought that it was and therefore omitted both words. But this does not appear to me to be correct as I have indicated. 10. Cf. with Jacob who did not recognize the relationship between Joseph and his brothers, and sent him to his brothers (Gen. 37.14) and David who sent Amnon to Absalom (2 Sam. 13.27). Both of them confronted grave tidings. David confronted the rumour and Jonadab. Jacob confronted his sons with Joseph's bloodsoaked coat in their hands (Gen. 37.32-33). Neither of them understood the complexities of the interpersonal relationships and the hatred among their children, and

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

183

extent David's comprehension of the strength of his feelings of guilt was dimmed,11 so that he was not left with the slightest inkling of what was taking place internally in his household. The climax of his words is divided into two: the one responsible for the death—Absalom—and the reason for the killing. Here, too, Jonadab does not speak directly, saying that Absalom performed the slaying, but he reports the incident in the words of the rumour that reached David (v. 30), 'for by the command of Absalom has this been ordained', that is to say: that it was decided as a result of Absalom's instructions to slay him.12 According to Jonadab, Absalom was motivated to commit the deed: 'from the day that he violated Tamar his sister'. The phrase 'his violation of (as used in the story of the incident by Tamar: 'Do not violate me' [v. 12] and later 'violated her and lay with her' [v. 14]) increases the intensity of the evil of the deed and conveys extremely negative connotations.13 But it does not surprise to hear language of this kind from Jonadab as he attempts to lessen the seriousness of Absalom's actions. I understand, both from the text and from what Jonadab says, that there was a familial rather than a political reason for the murder of Amnon. The words 'he violated Tamar his sister' explain the reason for Absalom's animosity. The reader knows the reason for the murder! It is nothing but an attempt to force David to realize that his understanding is lacking, and he believes a rumour which is so far reaching until a wise counsellor has to enlighten him. Even more so, the fact that Tamar is designated as Absalom's sister is surprising: these matters are both well known and well understood. But this rendering of the text serves to emphasize that his sister was consequently sent their sons into the lion's den. 11. Simon 1969: 35; Bar-Efrat 1980: 108, 206; McCarter 1984; Bowman (1985: 250). 12. Cf. Rashi and Segal (1964). is the passive participle form of the radical , Apparently the opinion of Abarbanel is not acceptable: 'He says "ordained" because he has vowed to avenge himself on Amnon and Jonadab heard this'. Nor is the opinion of Joseph Kara based on Targ. Jon.: to set an ambush (based on Josh. 8.2). Nor the opinion of Ewald (1878) who changes the word to the Arabic word the meaning of which is 'misfortune'. Nor the opinion of Tur-Sinai (1965) who changes the word to as in 'And his father kept the matter in mind' (Gen. 37.11). Nor the opinion of McCarter (1984) who reads: 'because the anger of Absalom was'— = anger, rage (as in 2 Kgs 24.20). 13. Cf. Gen. 34.2: 'And he lay with her and defiled her'—the rape of Dinah.

184

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

violated! And now according to Jonadab this generalized and vague phrase 'this thing' (13.20) becomes 'his violation of Tamar his sister'. This defined and explicit phrase gives prominence to the seriousness of the deed. And while Tamar is designated as Absalom's sister Amnon is not termed his brother here, because Jonadab seeks to justify Absalom's actions. He attempts to explain that this is what had to be done, essentially to show how base Amnon was. Therefore the omission of this appellation is of far-reaching significance. The narrator, by employing the verb violate and by designating Tamar as his sister, reflects the thoughts and the emotions of Absalom. In other words: the narrator by what he chooses to divulge and by what he chooses to withhold conveys things from the point of view of Absalom (Bar-Efrat 1980: 228). It would appear to me that Jonadab's speech is structured as a pivot pattern to highlight the essence of the episode, which is mentioned at the climax. A secondary character, Jonadab, opens David's eyes to what is going on around him; it is presented by Jonadab but from the point of view of Absalom. David fails to appreciate or understand what it is that motivates his son. It would seem therefore that the climax of this pattern, contained in the utterances of Jonadab, is the transgression of Amnon, which serves to justify Absalom's actions. 3. Na'aman's Words to Elisha (2 Kings 5.18) A

For this thing may the Lord pardon your servant C when my Lord comes to the house of Rimmon to worship there X and he leans on my hand, C' I worship in the house of Rimmon, and in my worshipping in the house of Rimmon B' may the Lord please pardon your servant A1 for this thing. B

This pivot pattern (cf. Cohn 1983: 179) contains the second part of the statement by Na'aman, the commander of the army of Aram, after he had been cured of his leprosy at Elisha's behest. The intensity of Na'aman's emotion in this brief speech is overwhelming; his confusion causes him to reiterate what he says. He does this in order to apologise for the fact that, despite his loyalty to the Lord, God of Israel, it is still incumbent upon him to fulfil his official duty regarding the rituals of the gods of Aram, which is imposed upon him.

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

185

This emotion is not expressed in his first utterances (v. 17), which are not structured as a pivot pattern. It would seem that the opinion of those researchers (Gray 1964: 452; Montgomery-Gehman 1967: 379 and others) who maintain that this verse contains glosses, revisions and repetitions is not acceptable. Despite the fact that the structure of the verse seems cumbersome, it reflects a rugged and vigorous style of speech.14 The pivot pattern under review is (almost) perfect and it contains three parallel elements, two of which are replicated and one of which contains certain changes.!5 The introduction of the structure containing the words 'for this thing'16 serves to illustrate his confusion. He is unable to find an appropriate introduction to his speech and simply speaks the truth after previously having stated that 'for thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt offering nor sacrifice to other gods, but to the Lord' (v. 17) (cf. Zakovitch 1985: 87). He uses this expression, too, at the conclusion of the pattern, but with the minor substitution of the preposition 'in' for the preposition 'to'. The non-specific comments which he makes express confusion17 but precede a request for pardon: May the Lord pardon your servant—Na'aman is in awe or simply does not feel comfortable with commencing the essence of what he is about to say, the description of the situation, and therefore he states a request for pardon prior to it.18 Na'aman's approach is to the prophet, 14. Cf. Talmon 1977: 154; Zakovitch 1985: 86; Cogan-Tadmor 1988. Talmon is of the opinion that the Hebrew text combines two versions which are divided into inverted orders of the constituents in the sentence: 1. In this thing the Lord pardon thy servant... and I bow myself in the house of Rimon. 2. For bowing down in the house of Rimmon, may the Lord pardon your servant in this thing. This does not appear to me to be correct. The structure reinforces the opinion that there are no addenda and changes (Zakovitch 1985: 87). The embarrassment which gives rise to the repetition, and also the pivot pattern, can be compared with 1 Sam. 3.17, and see Chapter 2, section 7. There too the word 'thing' is repeated. 15. A perfect structure such as this, a chiastic heptastich, where only the centre is not duplicated, appears in a number of sections of the biblical text (Lev. 11.24-28 for example). See Zakovitch 1979: 417-19, 449. 16. LXX LV and the Peshitta read 'And for this thing' with the adversative waw meaning 'but'. 17. The repetition results from the display of embarrassment which stems from a frustrated desire to convince, and this occurs in 2 Kgs 1.13-14 cf. Zakovitch 1985. 18. Zakovitch 1985: 87.

186

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

but the requested pardon will emanate from the Lord who has dispatched the prophet. That is to say, the prophet serves as an intercessionary between him and the Lord in his request for forgiveness (cf. Jer. 15.1). The supremacy of the Lord and his prophet is expressed by Na'aman, the Aramaean military commander, by means of his promise to worship the Lord exclusively (v. 17) and by designating himself your servant (twice in this verse, once in v. 16, and twice in v. 17). In the parallel hemistich, too, he reiterates his request for pardon with the addition of the word pleased The duplication of the request for pardon reinforces his submission to the Lord and expresses his embarrassment as well. It would appear that the word 'please' is original, and besides indicating an increase in his embarrassment it appears at the conclusion of his words, as it appears at their beginning. There / pray thee or please occurs at the commencement of his request for 'two mules burden of earth'—'be given—I pray thee' (v. 17). Here it appears at the conclusion of the speech in a request for pardon. In the third hemistich, too, after his apology, Na'aman still does not get to the essence of what he says. He merely hints at it: he does not describe his own action but rather the action of his master—his king, which explains what is stated in the parallel hemistich—why he would be involved in the situation about which he is obliged to apologize, because his master worships in the house of Rimmon and he is forced to escort him—when my Lord comes to the house of Rimmon to worship there. This element is not duplicated ('when my lord comes') because it does not arouse Na'aman's confusion. In parallel with the use of similar words and radicals he arrives at the essence, by means of duplication20 which flows from embarrassment: in my worshipping in the house of Rimmon.21 In my worshipping22 in the house of Rimmon—

the essence of what he relates is situated at the conclusion. There is a 19. In the MT, this represents the written version and not the version to be read. It is deleted in LXX LV as well as in the Aramaic translation and possibly it is in parallel to the hemistich parallel to the verse. 20. In the opinion of Montgomery-Gehman 1967 that this is a duplication of the words and I shall bow down. 21. The name Rimmon is mentioned in Akkadian as Raman as well as in the name Tabrimmon (1 Kgs 15.18). It is an appellation for Hadad El, the god of the storm and the rain. His name is taken from the root (Zech. 12.1), cf. Cogan-Tadmor 1988. 22. In LXX LV—'when he bows down' (i.e. the King of Aram). On bowing down in the house of God, see 2 Kgs 19.37.

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

187

deviation from the perfect pattern in other elements. Apparently the intention of the narrator is clear: Na'aman, the embarrassed, hesitates to reveal the fact of his worshipping Rimmon. He seeks as far as is possible to delay conveying this detail. As a result of this he inverts the order and places the reason for worshipping before the fact of doing so: the need to escort his master in the performance of the rituals. To be precise: he does not say 'and I worship Rimmon', but he says 'the house of Rimmon', because he promised in his previous remarks that brought about his apology (v. 17) to worship the Lord God of Israel exclusively. The failure to mention the name of the gods is noticeable, in that in the majority of other sections of the text in Scripture they speak of worshipping the specific god (Deut. 4.19, 8.19; Jer. 7.2; Zech. 14.16-17) (see Zakovitch 1985: 88). At the centre of the pattern we find the words 'and he leans on my hand'.23 That is to say: his worshipping was a theological imperative occasioned by the ceremony. It is therefore understandable that the commander of the army was not free to evade this responsibility and his duty was to attend the king when he prayed and to support him during the ritual ceremony. I can infer from this that the pivot pattern under review, structured like a citadel, has at its commencement the apology and the request for forgiveness in 'this thing', in other words in this incident, where there is the appearance of a suspicion of idolatry, subsequent to which Na'aman mentions the matter of worshipping: initially with reference to his lord and only afterwards does he make mention of his own worshipping, in duplicate, which emanates from his embarrassment. At the climax of the pattern we find the principal reason for this fact: his obligation to accompany the king and his lack of freedom to do as he pleases. The reason, at the climax of the pattern, links in one sentence Na'aman with his lord, very effectively, just as we find in the other sentences in which they speak separately, either about his lord (the third element in the pattern) or about him (the fifth element in parallel). If we assume that the fact of worshipping is deserving of a place at the centre of the pattern, then the structure indicates that in Na'aman's opinion the reasons for worshipping are the most significant explanation for Elisha who is benefiting him and therefore are at the climax of 23. His commentary: and he leans on my hand, when he bends over at the time of his bowing down. Cf. 'There then the officer on whose hand the King leaned answered the man of God' (2 Kgs 7.2, 17).

188

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

the structure. Moreover, formal overt subordination to his king is parallel to his subjection to the Lord God of Israel. Just as his genuine subjection to the Lord obliges subordination to man, to Elisha a man of God, so his overt formal subordination to man, to his king, obliges him to be overtly subordinate to the gods of Aram, to Rimmon (Zakovitch 1985: 90). Analysis of the structure of this verse and the revealing of the reason for the repetition proves that there is no necessity to revise the text or to delete sections of it. The climax is connected both to Na'aman's previous utterances which provide the reason for his inability to fulfil that which he has promised, as well as to the remarks which will follow in the subsequent episode (vv. 20-27), in which Gehazi appears and manifests a false subjection to the Lord and to his prophet, and is consequently infected with Na'aman's leprosy. 4. Hezekiah's Prayer (2 Kings 19.15-19) A

O Lord God of Israel who sittest upon the cherubim thou art the God even thou alone. B of all the kingdoms of the earth C thou hast made heaven and earth D Lord, bend thy ear and hear: open, Lord, thy eyes and see: and hear the words of Sanheriv, and him he has sent to taunt the living God X Of a truth, Lord, the kings of Assyria have destroyed the nations and their land, D1 and have cast their gods into the fire: for they were no gods C' but the work of men's hands, wood and stone: therefore they have destroyed them B1 Now therefore, O Lord our God, I beseech thee, save thou us out of his hand, that all the Kingdoms of the earth may know A' that thou art the Lord God even thou only

(v. 15)

(v. 16)

(v. 17) (v. 18)

(v. 19)

Hezekiah's prayer before the Lord is set out in a pivot pattern. It also appears in Isa. 37.16-20. There are six small differences between the two versions, but they are of such limited significance that they do not change the pivot pattern. The alterations appear in the notes at the end of this chapter. The prayer appears after his remarks to Isaiah,24 his 24. Attention should be given to the words of Isaiah: 'It may be the Lord thy God will hear all the words of Rabshakeh whom the King of Assyria, his master, has sent to taunt the living God' (37.4). The words of his prayer to God (37.16):

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

189

reply and the proud utterances of Rabshakeh (Isa. 37.10-13). Here as in previous instances his prayer comes after arrogant comments by Ravshaqe (2 Kgs 18.19-35). The introduction of the prayer consists of a cry in the ineffable name of the Lord, as was the custom of the time, and to make it abundantly clear that the prayer was made to the Lord (cf. Greenberg 1982: 903). Hezekiah turns to the Lord his God using many titles: the Lord25 God of Israel, who sitteth on the cherubim26—possibly in contradistinction to Ravshaqe's vainglorious outpourings which he spoke regarding a multitude of nations and kings. He employed this appellation (cf. 1 Kgs 1.30, 48, 8.17, 20; 2 Kgs 9.6; etc.) as an allusion to the fact that the Lord has entered into a covenant with the people of Israel and is obliged to redeem the nation with whom the covenant was entered into. This is an allusion to the additional fact that he prayed for the peace of Israel and for its redemption of its enemies. After this initial address Hezekiah moves to the prayer itself, which is structured as a pivot pattern. He begins with an expression of praise in which he describes the magnificence of the Lord, thus justifying the hope which Hezekiah has placed in him. The praise and the thanksgiving precede the request and contain the reasoning behind Hezekiah's expectation for a favourable response.27 His opening remarks 'thou art the God even thou alone' are almost identical to the conclusion (v. 19): 'that thou art the Lord God even thou only'. The addition of the word 'that'' after his previous words serves to introduce a conclusion which has been drawn, whereas only the words 'the Lord' are used in the introduction prior to this. These opening remarks are in contrast to the boastful and arrogant comments made by Rabshakeh in the name of the Assyrian king (cf. particularly 2 Kgs 18.30; 19.22) and serve to stress 'Lord, bend thy ear and hear, and hear the words of Sennacherib, and him he has sent to taunt the living God.' 25. In a parallel version, in Isa. 37.16 (in Chron. Hezekiah's prayer is omitted), it is stated 'the Lord of Hosts'. So also in LXX and the Peshitta. This is the conventional formula appended to the image of God seated over the cherubim. Cf. 1 Sam. 4.4; 2 Sam. 6.2. 26. From this appellation researchers concluded that Hezekiah delivered his prayer in the holy of holies, or close to it (Gray 1964: 625; Staudt 1980: 297). But this is doubtful. 27. Greenberg (1982: 901) speaks of the typical structure of a prayer, appropriate to Hezekiah's prayer as well. Cf. Deut. 3.24; 2 Sam. 7.22-24; 1 Kgs 3.6; 1 Chron. 29.11-12.

190

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

the oneness and the ascendancy of the Lord God of Israel. This phrase occurs frequently in Scripture,28 as in Deut. 4.35 for example.29 More pointedly the phrase appears in contrast to Sanherib's utterances, in which he maintains that the Lord is powerless against the gods of the nations and that he will be unable to redeem Jerusalem from the Assyrian host (2 Kgs 18.32-35; 19.10-12) (cf. Rofe 1982: 79). As Sannacherib bestows the title 'the great king' upon himself (18.19), so Hezekiah states 'thou art the God, even thou alone' and Sennacherib is not the great king that he claims to be (Abarbanel). The duplication of his words in the commencement and then in the conclusion serves to emphasize the omnipotence of the Lord, not only amongst his own people but also in all the kingdoms of the earth. And there is no doubt that both the opening and the closing lines as in other cases constitute the ideastic climax of the pattern. I find in the second hemistich that the Lord alone is God of all the kingdoms on earth,30 and not as Sennacherib states that every kingdom has its own deity (18.34; 19.12). If the phrase constitutes an indirect object in apposition in this hemistich, 'for the Lord', then in the parallel hemistich in the pattern: save thou us31 out of his hand that all the kingdoms of the earth may know, the phrase 'all the kingdoms of the earth' is the subject: they know that he is God alone. And all the kingdoms will know this when they see that the deities have not saved their subjects but that the Lord has redeemed Jerusalem. His request is that the might of the Lord and his salvation will be magnified in the eyes of all the kingdoms of the earth, in that Assyria takes pride in her victories and her conquests. I can infer from this that Hezekiah, who glorifies the Lord as 'the Lord God even thou alone of all the kingdoms in the earth', prays to his God and asks that this knowledge and recognition will become the inheritance of all the kingdoms of the earth. The request appears after the word 'and now' (v. 19) which constitutes an opening to conclusions

28. Ps. 86.10; Neh. 9.6 etc. This type occurs too in David's prayer (2 Sam. 7.28) and in Solomon's prayer (1 Kgs 8.60), and cf. 83.19. 29. This phrase and others prove, in the opinion of researchers, that the phraseology of the prayer—is Deuteronomistic. Cf. Weinfeld (1972: 321; Staudt 1980: 300). 30. The expression is repeated in Deut. 28.25; Isa. 23.17; Jer. 15.4 etc. 31. The radical is characteristic of prayers. Cf. Ps. 80.4, 8, 20.

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

191

drawn from words which were spoken prior to this,32 in the prayer which he has offered up. The words 'now therefore ...I beseech thee'33 as a request appear also in 1 Sam. 15.25, 2 Sam. 24.10. As the rationale for this request, that the kingdoms will become aware that the Lord is God by virtue of the great salvation that will be wrought by Him and which will sanctify His name (cf. Na'aman's comments [2 Kgs 5.15]), and thereby Hezekiah identifies his concern with that of the God of Israel: he stresses his exalted virtues and the continued existence of those who worship him: the sanctification of God's name and its glorification in the world are in direct contrast to Sennacherib's pronouncements.34 In the third hemistich of the pattern, but still within the framework of praise and thanksgiving to the creator, Hezekiah describes the omnipotence of the Lord by mentioning the act of creatio ex nihilo as described in Gen. 1.1, Thou hast made heaven and earth (2 Kgs 19.15),35 in order to prove that God alone is the living God and the God of truth (cf. Jer. 10.10-11).36 And as he has made (created) the earth he alone is God of all the kingdoms on earth. He contrasts the glorious act of creation by the Lord God of Israel with the work of man's hands, the idols in the parallel hemistich of the pattern: but the work of men's hands, wood and stone; therefore they have destroyed them. He utilizes the language of Deuteronomy: 'gods, the work of man's hands wood and stone'31 (Deut. 4.28). The tone of the language is one of contempt, in that man has created them, and therefore the kings of Assyria are able to destroy them. There is another meaning to these words: just as there is no substance in an icon made in the image of a god, so there is no substance in the god itself. After the approach and the encomium to the Lord, the body of Hezekiah's 32. Cf. in the following pivot structures: 1 Sam. 8.7-9; 2 Sam. 13.32-33. 33. In Isaiah and in LXX the words 'I beseech thee (K])' are omitted. In the majority of the sections of the text, too, these words are omitted, and it is only in Ps. 118.25 that the words 'Save, we beseech thee' occur. 34. So in Jer. 14.7, 21; Ps. 25.11, 79.9, 143.11. Cf. Greenberg 1982: 903. 35. The expression is repeated too in Ps. 115.15, 121.2, 124.8, 2 Chron. 2.11, etc. 36. And thus in other prayers. Cf. 1 Kgs 8; 1 Chron. 29.10-19, 2 Chron. 20.20. The prayer format is clear. Cf. Corvin 1972: 209. 37. Similar language, the language of contempt, occurs in Deut. 27.15, 28.64, 31.29; Ps. 115.4; 135.15. And cf. Isaiah's description of the fashioning of the idol: 40.17-20,44.9-19.

192

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

request (cf. Greenberg 1982: 902) appears in an extended formulaic version structured in parallel hemistichoi of a request to give heed: bend thine ear and hear;38 open, Lord, thy eyes and see: (and cf. the language of Dan. 9.18) and hear the words [in Isa. 37.17 and in LXX— 'all my words'] of Sennacherib39 and him he has sent40 to taunt the living God(v. 16). As stated above there is a virtually literal repetition of his request in Isa. 37.4 and he stresses, in contradistinction to Sennacherib's vilifying diatribe (18.35; 19.22-23),41 that the God of Israel 'is the living God', in contrast to those who 'were no gods' mentioned in the parallel hemistich in the pattern: and have cast42their gods into the fire for they were no gods (v. 18). Hezekiah establishes the substance of the Lord God of Israel, the living God in contradistinction to the nullity of the idols, and compares the belief in national deities (as Rabshekeh states) with the Lord who has created the world. The expression the living God is repeated in Jer. 23.36, Hos. 2.1, Psalms 42^3 in order to indicate that he is the only true god amongst the deities who are devoid of any vestige of life. At the climax of the pattern we find the following: Of a truth, Lord, the kings of Assyria have destroyed the nations and their land (v. 17).43 38. The expression is repeated in a number of prayers: Ps. 17.6, 31.3, 71.2, etc. 39. There are those who maintain (cf. Garsiel 1987: 32) that the biblical author utilizes the name Sennacherib to form two similar words from it: sword-taunt Two name derivations are included in a harsh criticism delivered by Isaiah of Sanheriv the destroyer, who taunts the living God: In Hezekiah's prayer we find: 'Sennacherib', 'to taunt', 'they destroyed' (17), 'thou taunted' (22, 25), and 'I have destroyed' (24). Jenkins (1976: 289) is of the opinion that the name Sennacherib was added to this verse by a later editor. This definitely does not seem to be the case to me. 40. In Isa. 37.17—'he sent' and not 'he sent him'. This is more appropriate, and possibly the words 'him he has sent appear in this verse influenced by the same words in 2 Kgs 19.4. 41. The language occurring in prayer: Ps. 44.17, 'For the voice of him that taunts and blasphemes', 74.10, 'How long will the adversary taunt', etc. 42. The words 'and he gave are in the form of an absolute infinitive. Burney (1970b) maintains that this reading is correct. 43. In Isaiah it is written 'All the lands and their land' (37.18). Talmon (1955: 209) maintains that this version, in Kings in which there are parallel definitions (cf. Hab. 3.12, Ps. 2.8), results from a combination between 'all the lands' and 'the nations' = the nations and their land. See Seeligman (1956: 134) who defines this as an unintentional error and weighs the possibility that the text actually read 'and

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

193

Here too the approach is to the Lord, as occurs overtly in a number of instances in his prayer (15-'the Lord God of Israel'; 16-'the Lord, the Lord'; 17-'the Lord'; 19-'the Lord our God') to the Lord. In both the commencement and the conclusion the approach is somewhat extended. Apparently this is the case, so that there is a clear distinction between Hezekiah's supplication and the posturing of Rabshakeh and his abusive language aimed at the Lord God of Israel.44 At the centre of his utterances Hezekiah expresses limited thanks for the fact that there is a degree of verity in what Sanherib contends, that the Assyrians laid waste the lands of the nations and their deities were helpless to defend them, because they were not true gods. This destruction of the land by the king of Assyria, which Hezekiah mentions, is in direct contrast to the creation (the making) by the Lord of the Heaven and the Earth (v. 16). The kings of Assyria devastate the land of the nations. There exists here a pointed distinction between 'the living God' and those who were no gods and the other deities. At the centre of the pattern we find the antithesis to that which is written at its peripheries. It is a fact, that Assyria ravaged the nations and their land. Hezekiah does not deny this, but this fact determines that their national deities failed to withstand them (the Assyrians). Contrary to this, the Lord who is God alone of all the kingdoms on earth stands in support of the people of Israel. I can infer from this that the fact that the supremacy of the Lord God of Israel is situated at the conclusion of the pattern (and also at its commencement here) as a conclusion drawn by Hezekiah's request, that the Lord manifests his might and his greatness. In the centre of the pattern there is a contradiction to the assumption regarding the capacity (2 Kgs 5.12) or the apparent capacity, at first glance, of the Lord God of Israel (19.17) stated thus: the destruction by the Assyrians of the lands of the nations. Apparently this structure is associated with other structures (see sec tion 5 of Chapter 7 in this study) in which the central idea is not situated at the climax of the pattern. It is possible that Hezekiah's comments on the destruction wrought by the Assyrian kings on the land of the nations is placed at the centre in order not to duplicate them in the parallel elements, thereby stressing as it were Assyrian power. they destroyed [and not the nations'. 44. Staudt (1980: 304) is of the opinion that the many appellations for the Lord appeared at a time when idolatry was widespread in Judah.

194

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

The prayer attributed to Hezekiah relates to contemporary events (see Cogan-Tadmor 1988) where the central fact, the Assyrian conquests and the danger to Jerusalem gives cause for anxiety, finds expression at the centre of the structure. But the supposition and the hope situated at the peripheries serve to nullify the information expressed at the centre. In the course of his prayer Hezekiah negates absolutely the gods of the nations and particularly the Assyrian deities and pronounces that the Lord God of Israel is the only God and is supreme,45 and he does this against the background of the horror of the time. 5. The Advice ofHushai to Absalom and its Approval (2 Samuel 17.7-14) At the focus of the narrative of Absalom's rebellion against his father David we find a description of a competition between advisors. Ahitophel, 'David's counsellor', is here serving Absalom (2 Sam. 15.12), against Hushai 'David's friend' (15.37). The reader's curiosity is aroused by this and he needs to know who the victor will be. There is an early allusion to this competition situated in the description of their simultaneous entry into Jerusalem (16.15-16). Ahitophel is the senior counsellor who enjoys extensive authority, and whose reputation goes before him; he also has the esteem of the nation as the author mentions in an aside ('it was as if a man would enquire of God' [16.23]). Hushai too is described as a man of considerable intellectual capacity, even if this is not reflected in his rank, and in his own words he has been sent to confound Ahitophel's counsel (16.34). Each of them speaks twice to Absalom. On the first occasion they both succeed in persuading Absalom (16.16-19; 21-22). Now they face a new challenge. Ahitophel's advice precedes that of Hushai (vv. 1-3). His task is difficult, even though he has been sent for this purpose by David (15.34).46 First because Ahitophel enjoys considerable authority. Secondly, Ahitophel's advice, that Hushai is expected to subvert, was actually not only very sound, but was recognized as such by Absalom and all the elders of Israel (v. 4). In other words: Hushai is confronted by 45. Weinfeld (1992: 211) perceives a liturgical speech, which includes a declaration of the unity of God and his dominion over the world as well as over the chosen of Israel, in Hezekiah's prayer. 46. This brings to mind Judah's situation after the goblet was found in Benjamin's saddlebag when he approaches Joseph to talk to him (Gen. 44.17-18).

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

195

having to outwit Ahitophel the wise and not Absalom. He therefore had to devise an extremely cunning plan and to present his ideas in both an attractive and a persuasive way, in order that his listeners would change their opinion, already crystallized, and would accept that the good advice was in fact bad, and that the poor counsel was in fact good (BarEfrat 1979: 33). Hushai in his wisdom decides to stress Absalom's splendour so that his stupidity would nullify Ahitophel's wisdom, and every detail of what he says is concentrated on achieving this end. Z And Hushai said to Absalom. The counsel that Ahitophel has given is not good at this time (v. 7) A For, said Hushai, thou knowst thy father and his men that they are mighty men (v. 8) B And they are embittered like a bear robbed of its cubs in the field and thy father is a man of war, and will not spend the night with the people (v. 9) Y Behold he is hid now in some pit or in some other place: and it will come to pass when some of them fall in the first attack whoever hears it will say, There is a slaughter among the people that follow Absalom. B1 And even a hero whose heart is like a heart of a lion shall utterly melt (v. 10) A1 For all Israel knows that thy father is a mighty man and they who are with him are valiant men X Therefore / counsel (v. 11) M all Israel shall be gathered unto thee from Dan even to Beer-Sheba N as the sand that is by the sea for multitude O and that thou go to battle in thine own person N' So shall we come upon him in some place where he shall be found and we shall encamp around him like the dew falling on the ground, and of him and of all the men that are with him there shall not be left so much as one. (v. 12) M' Moreover if he withdraw himself to some city, then shall all Israel bring ropes to that city and we will drag it to the nearest ravine, until there be not one small stone found there. (v. 13) Z' And Absalom and all the men of Israel said, the counsel of Hushai the Arkite is better than the counsel of Ahitophel. (v. 14)

Over and above its rhetorical and literary attributes the speech is structured as a special pivot pattern, in that the negation of Ahitophel's speech by Hushai (v. 7) is parallel with the acceptance and confirmation of Hushai's counsel by Absalom (v. 14). The essence of Hushai's speech is divided into two segments (vv. 8-10; 11-13) which are almost

196

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

equal in the number of words in each (65 as against 64). Each segment is structured in pivot form with five elements. It therefore becomes abundantly clear that vv. 7 to 14 must be included in the pivot pattern.47 And Hushai said to Absalom, The counsel that Ahitophel has given is not good at this time (v. 7). Hushai responds with these words to Absalom's remarks in the first segment of v. 6: 'Ahitophel has spoken after such and such a manner [not so]?'48 Absolom's tone is aggressive and there is a note of arrogance in what he says, and his unequivocal question forces Hushai to reveal his opinion at the outset. His first words 'is not good' illustrates that Hushai has decided once again (see 16.16) to open with positive comments about the king (cf. Fokkelman 1981: 215). These first words are aimed at undermining the extensive authority and the reputation enjoyed by Ahitophel as an advisor. But with considerable guile he immediately adds 'at this time'. 'As an admission that Ahitophel's advice in the past has been sound and by this acknowledgment he demonstrates that his opinion is not motivated by jealousy or hatred, and as a result of this stratagem his auditors are left in doubt as to whether perhaps Ahitophel has indeed erred 'this time' as Hushai has indicated' (Ehrlich 1900). With this opening Hushai demonstrates that he shares the widespread adoration of Ahitophel, but he intrudes a

47. Contrary to Bar-Efrat (1980), who includes vv. 8-13 only in his structure, I do not accept this. Are Hushai's words in v. 7 not part of the speech? I shall attempt to prove that this is so. In fact in v. 14b as well 'And the Lord commanded' ... the dual causality, is an integral part of the fabric of the narrative. When David is informed about Ahitophel's joining up with the conspirators, he prays: Turn Ahitophel's counsel, O Lord, into foolishness' (15.31). In what follows, the author defines the advice of Ahitophel 'as if a man would enquire of God' (16.23). There is an expectation here that Ahitophel's plot will be made to fail by divine intervention. See Talshir 1982: 76. 48. It is not the concern of this study to investigate why Absalom was not satisfied with the sound counsel of Ahitophel, which was confirmed both by him and also the elders of Israel (v. 4). Possibly Hushai enjoyed prestige as 'a companion of the king' (15.37) who knew him better than others, and possibly he was not satisfied with his advice, which did not allocate any role for him in the overall plan. Possibly the tendency to take counsel from a number of advisors (Prov. 11.14, 15.22, 24.6) (Conroy 1983: 178). Cf. Rehoboam who seeks counsel with the elders and with the young men (there is a great similarity between that episode and this one). But even more so: a king who accepts advice from a counselor is ipso facto not the decision maker. But this was not the decisive factor in choosing between the counsel of the two advisors.

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

197

surprise element against a background of the boundless acceptance of Ahitophel's counsel. His conclusion is declared before all and prepares the ground for the audience to give attention to his words out of a desire and a readiness to accept them without opposition. Together with this he arouses both suspense and curiosity by the use of the surprise element in his utterances as a result of the equilibrium. Both things exert considerable psychological influence, and increase in great measure the prospect of his listeners paying careful attention to what he says. To say the least he acts in a most effective and circumspect way against the unanimously favourable opinion held regarding Ahitophel (Bar-Efrat 1979: 33). Hushai's utterances are distinguished by the irony inherent in them. Ahitophel's advice is certainly 'not good', but for whom? Attention should be given to the attributive clause 'the advice that Ahitophel has given' qualifying the substantive 'the counsel ... is not good'. This clause in fact is unnecessary. There is no doubt that the narrator emphasizes words derived from the radical 'counsels ' (cf. 16.23—three words from this radical) in order to indicate the extraordinary authority invested in Ahitophel, which Hushai rejects on this occasion (Conroy 1983: 184). The radical 'counsels ' which recurs twice in this verse is reiterated at the centre of the pattern (v. 11) as well as its conclusion (v. 14a-twice). At the centre of the pattern the text indicates ('therefore I counsel') that Hushai makes his recommendations after his refutation of Ahitophel's advice. This phrase, as it appears in the pattern, distinguishes between the two segments of his address. The word 'counsel' is mentioned twice at the conclusion of the pattern in order to contrast between the two pieces of advice, that of Ahitophel, and that of Hushai: 7. 14a.

The counsel that Ahitophel has given is not good at this time the counsel of Hushai is better than the counsel of Ahitophel.

If it was Hushai who initially claimed that the counsel of Ahitophel was not good then here Absalom states his agreement, not negatively, but simply that Hushai's counsel is better than that of Ahitophel. This judgmental consequence appears like an iterative echo of Hushai's opinion. The text and the form prove that Hushai's mission has been successful, he has convinced his audience to accept his viewpoint.49 So, what

49. Attention should be given to the chiasmus created between v. 7 and v. 14:

198

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Absalom says (and this applies to all Israel) appears in direct speech (v. 14) in contrast to his words after Ahitophel has given his counsel (v. 4), which are stated by the narrator (cf. Conroy 1983: 190). Attention should also be given to who participates in stating approval of Hushai's counsel together with Absalom. In v. 4 it is 'all the elders of Israel' whereas at the conclusion of the pattern it is 'all the men of Israel' (v. 14a).50 It would appear that the experienced elders have been overlooked and their decision rejected because of the opinion of 'all the men of Israel'.51 It is the enthusiasm of the majority that carries the day with Absalom and not the measured logic of the elders of the nation who continue to side with Ahitophel, and after their advice has been accepted they leave the place (Ralbag in his commentary). Absalom, by accepting Hushai's advice and showing preference for it over that of Ahitophel, has displayed an unintentional accession to David's request to Hushai: 'then mayest thou defeat for me the counsel of Ahitophel' (15.34). The commencement of Hushai's speech (v. 7), a decisive denial of the correctness of Ahitophel's counsel, represents a generalization, followed by a particularization. It begins with v. 8, which opens with the words 'and he said' as his utterances in v. 7 represent an answer to a question, 'shall we do as he says or not'? And now he responds to the

not good (v. 7)

better (v. 14a)

better

evil

(v. 14b)

And also at the end of the sentence in v. 14b: better-evil. 50. Cf. 'All Israel' which occurs three times in Hushai's speech (vv. 10, 11, 13) and in an ancient version of LXX, the phrase 'a man of Israel' also occurs. Cf. Trebolle (1979: 540), who attempts to indicate the existence through these terms of competition between the People of Israel and the Elders of Israel through counselors such as Ahitophel. Ahitophel's advice is mentioned in: 15.31, 16.21-23, 17.15b, 23 as well. 51. Reviv (1983: 88) thinks that the phrase is erroneous, and opines that it was not possible that one counsel was judged by one group and the other pertaining to the same matter was presented before another forum (p. 89). He maintains that the elders accepted the decision and not 'All Israel'. This does not appear to be correct, in that it would seem that the elders, who were experienced men, accepted the excellent advice of Ahitophel, which appealed to reason, while all of Israel accepted the advice of Hushai, which appealed to the emotions.

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

199

demand 'speak thou!' followed by 'and Hushai said' (v. 8).52 But it would seem, as is conventional in the formulae 'and he said ... and he said', that the phrase constitutes a delay. Hushai delayed in order to give the nation an opportunity to complete its reaction, which has obviously been heard, by the time they heard the startling things that Hushai had said to them, prior to this.53 And then he recommences his speech. The main address, which begins after the contradiction and the delay, is clearly structured from two segments, as has been seen in the pivot pattern. The first part (vv. 8-10) is devoted to revealing the weak points in Ahitophel's advice (which are in reality the actual strengths, but Hushai is concerned with presenting them as vulnerabilities). Whereas in the second section (vv. 11-13), which opens with the words 'therefore I counsel', the alternative plan is explained, which is, as it were, the better one. This first section is once again divided in two, starting where Hushai demonstrates why there is no prospect of Ahitophel's plan succeeding. After which he explains that this plan will not only fail to achieve the desired goals, but also on the contrary it has within it the potential to cause extensive damage and to lead to a personal catastrophe for Absalom himself. Hushai opens this first section with the words thou knowest thy father and his men that they are mighty men. This opening is aimed at Ahitophel whose advice Hushai has come to contradict, and whose counsel he intends to nullify, but they are aimed as well at Absalom. The latter addressed him in a tone that was both aggressive and potentially violent: 'speak thou'. Hushai responds to him with a hint 'thou knowest'. In other words: you are the son of David and you are better acquainted with the king than I am. Even more so, a new fact is established here, a trial approach to elicit information, and by so doing to attempt to eliminate all opposition, in order that the listener would not oppose what was said. In contrast to Ahitophel, he chooses seven verbs in the first person (cohortative): 'Let me choose ... and let me rise up'. Hushai places himself in the background and makes no mention of the part he plays

52. Shiloah 1964: 256. Attention should be given to the difference between the introductory words of the decree and its implementation: he spoke—and said. Thus also in Gen. 24.33-34, 44.4-6, etc. See Kravitz 1971: 23. 53. And cf. Bar-Efrat 1979: 33. But Conroy's opinion (1983) does not appear to me to be correct, because the second 'And he said' indicates that a significant speech is to follow.

200

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

(with the exception of a comment in the middle of the two segments, 'therefore I counsel'), but he does mention Absalom. He gives a broad hint regarding Ahitophel's error, indicating that all his actions are independent and do not include Absalom. A matter which gives rise, inter alia, to the rejection of his counsel and his plan. Hushai refers to David as 'your father' in contrast (v. 8, twice, 10). Ahitophel refers to him by various appellations: 'David' (1), 'King' (2), 'the man who you seek' (v. 3).54 From this emerges that Ahitophel was not particularly meticulous in formulating his words in accordance with the viewpoint of the listener, while Hushai, who possessed highly developed psychological insights, has used them prior to this by employing the title 'your father' (16.19). He utilizes the words 'your father' precisely in order to attune what he says to the viewpoint of Absalom (Bar-Efrat 1979: 34). He appeals to Absalom's emotions in order to indicate to him that it would be beneath his dignity to concentrate the entire war only against his father. In contrast to him, Ahitophel does not mention the term 'your father', even once, and he speaks to Absalom as if he is entirely devoid of feeling (Conroy 1983: 184). Hushai, with eminently good reason, does not use the title 'the king' when referring to David (as Ahitophel does) because Absalom is now the king. Hushai stresses that both David and his men 'are mighty men' (LXX adds 'heroes [great]', but this is not necessary) ('and they are embittered'), once again in contrast to Ahitophel who describes David as 'weary and weak handed' (v. 2), and that it would not be difficult to overcome him. The latter describes David as a man in old age, while the former presents a picture of him while still in his youth. Ahitophel describes the situation (correctly) in which David finds himself. Hushai speaks of his virtues. These utterances are parallel with Hushai's words at the conclusion of this section of the pattern (v. 10): for all Israel knows that your father is a mighty man and they who are with him are mighty men (v. 10). If Absalom (alone) was party to this knowledge according to the text in v. 8, then here the whole of Israel shares the knowledge that David is a hero. If prior to this it commences with 'and you', for reasons already outlined, here it opens with a verb, 'knows', to create a parallel with 'thou knowest'.55 Which 54. Only in his suggestion to Absalom to come to his father's concubines does he call his father 'your father' (on two occasions, 16.21), as he is obliged to do by the circumstances. 55. Many word pairs occur in Hushai's speech: 'knows', 'will surely melt',

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

201

responsible person could fail with this information and what everybody knows is obviously correct? He re-iterates the phrases, 'mighty man (men)', 'your father'. This repetition emphasizes these details and inculcates them thoroughly into the hearts and minds of the auditors. The demarcation of this section of the speech is clear—representing a type of summary before moving to the second section. Attention should be given to a change in the parallelism: thou knowest thy father and his men that they are mighty men for all Israel knows that thy father is a mighty man

(v. 8) (v. 10)

In the first sentence (in v. 8) the implied assumption, that recognition of the object ('your father') and its explanation involves a knowledge of the fact that the virtue mentioned ('that they are mighty men') expresses the essence of the subject and characterizes it more than anything else. That is to say: Hushai states that David and his men are mighty men and embittered and that these do not simply constitute certain of their virtues, among others, but represent their essential virtues, the substance and basis of their personalities (Bar-Efrat 1979: 35). While according to the structure of the sentence in v. 10 we learn that all of Israel regards the characteristic of valour as one of David's many virtues,56 but obviously it was the most important one at that time. It is no wonder that Hushai employs one version when speaking to Absalom and another when speaking to all Israel. This is appropriate for him in so far as he does not share the intimate knowledge of David possessed by Absalom. Hushai amplifies the impression created of the might of David's men (8) and he calls them here 'men of valour , a phrase which occurs frequently in Scripture (Deut. 3.18; 1 Sam. 14.52; 1 Chron. 26.30, 32; etc.). This is possibly done, too, to counter the irony of the term 'warrior ' (v. 10) when applied to Absalom's men and possibly as an implied allusion: that there are actually warriors scattered amongst Absalom's men, whereas the majority or possibly even all of David's men are warriors. In addition, 'And even a warrior' represents a concessive phrase. 'Men of valour' is the predicate of the main sentence, thus highlighting the description. Which ever way, there 'whoever hears it', 'they should be gathered' , etc. Cf. Fokkelman 1981: 221; Conroy 1983: 186. 56. Attention should be given to the fact that in v. 8 David and his men are heroes. In v. 10 David is singled out as a hero, his servants as mighty men

202

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

is an evasive response to Ahitophel, that if he were to go out with his men to battle, he would encounter men of valour and warriors (BarEfrat 1979: 38). In order to nullify Ahitophel's advice, and in order to deter Absalom from mounting a sudden nocturnal attack, Hushai emphasizes the heroism of David and his men by the use of the phrases 'mighty men', 'man of war' and 'and men of valour'. But he emphasizes this more strongly by the use of images which have the potential to create a perception and an impression of David's men in living and vital form. At first 'as a bear robbed of its cubs' (v. 8) (LXX adds here 'Like a pig caught in a cleft'), like a she-bear whose young ones have been preyed upon and who fights with courage, placing her own life at risk (Hos. 13.8; Prov. 17.12), and in the course of v. 10 as a parallel to the man of Israel,57 who hears a rumour of a slaughter, who even if he has the heart of a lion 'he shall utterly melt'. The image of the lion as a symbol of strength (Num. 23.24; Judg. 14.18) occurs frequently in Scripture. Two categories of people are being described in these images: the first those who are unnerved by defeat and despairs, and the second who are spurred to greater effort by failure, in an attempt to overcome the stumbling blocks. Each one of these is known to us individually from the Bible, as has been stated. But we find the word pair lion-bear in parallel, as it occurs here, a number of times58 in the Bible. It was apparently a well-known parallel, and when one of the animals is mentioned the second animal is mentioned too (see 1 Sam. 17.34, 36, 37; Isa. 11.7; Amos 5.19; etc.). If in v. 8 the strength and bitterness59 of David's men is compared to 'the bear robbed of its cubs in the field', then in the parallel hemistich of the structure (v. 10) it is in contrast to the man in Absalom's camp, 57. Radak explains 'and he' as referring to Ahitophel. Rabbi Josef Kara and the Ralbag indicate that it refers to David. This is somewhat astonishing. Would the heart of David really melt? Certain of the moderns maintain that it refers to the approaching warrior. Rashi's commentary is, however, correct and it refers to the listener in the previous verse, and this is how both Rav Caspi and Ehrlich (1900) explain it. LXX LV reads 'And he was' in place of 'He'. 58. 'Bear' (in the singular) is mentioned only once on its own and not in a word pair with the word 'lion' in the Bible! 59. Gordon (1965) is of the opinion, based on the Ugaritic, that the radical "HO, here translated as 'bitterness', is the equivalent of the Hebrew word for 'strong'. In addition then to 'bitterness' .the phrase in this section of the text is parallel to 'mighty men of valour' (1965: 1556, 19).

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

203

where even if he is a man of valour and he has the heart of a lion he will surely melt. With the assistance of the literary devices in the sentence—two metaphors ('heart', 'melt'), a simile ('like the heart of lion'), repetition ('he will surely melt i, antithesis ('the heart of a lion—he will surely melt')—Hushai creates a most tangible picture of terror, which could not possibly make a positive impression on the audience nor influence them to fight (Bar-Efrat 1979: 37). At the climax of the pattern of the first section of the structure the anticipated denouement is described: 'Behold he is hid now in some pit or in some other place and it will come to pass when some of them fall in the first attack whoever hears it will say, There is a slaughter among the people who follow Absalom' (v. 9). The words 'Behold now' stimulate Absalom and his band to imagine what lies in the future, which Hushai describes in extremely concrete terms. The words 'whoever hears' (cf. 'Whoever hears the sound of the shofar' [Ezra 33.4]) increase the attention of the listeners, and this effect is achieved by the device of direct quotation regarding the slaughter in the camp, introduced by Ahitophel. There is a negative connotation to the phrase mentioned which magnifies the report of the slaughter to the proportions of a catastrophe (as in 2 Sam. 13.30). It is obvious that Ahitophel's name is not mentioned here but Absalom's is! He is the one who will be involved and he is the one who will be responsible for the serious failure of the nocturnal attack (Conroy 1983: 186). The slaughter is situated at the centre of the pattern in order to alarm and terrify Absalom, because even an initial and partial failure is liable to cause Absalom to lose everything (Bar-Efrat 1979: 37). The narrator's language spoken by Hushai approximates his own in the reporting of the event, regarding the defeat of Absalom's camp: 'and there was a great slaughter that day of twenty thousand men' (18.7).60 Possibly Hushai mentions this by way of association with that period of heroism in which David was involved, when he produces evidence that he (David) was successful through strength and resourcefulness in the most trying conflicts under dangerous and critical conditions. Absalom's men will have to get the measure of a formidable adversary, who qualitatively is far superior to them. Ahitophel's plan—in the opinion 60. Within this context another word may be mentioned, which links Hushai's speech with Absalom's defeat: Hushai mentions the word 'pits' in which David was possibly hiding (v. 9). After the death of Absalom they threw his body 'into a large pit' (18.17).

204

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

of Hushai—has not taken this fact into account sufficiently. It is based on an incorrect premise; and therefore does not contain the ingredients for success, but is likely to give rise to disaster (Bar-Efrat 1979: 39). After Hushai has contradicted Ahitophel's advice and deterred Absalom comme ilfaut, he turns his attention once again to his own counsel,, which also contains images. If in the first section he has made a camouflaged appeal to logic, he now makes a call on the emotions. He enjoys an advantage in that he has already had an opportunity of hearing and digesting Ahitophel's utterances and he now follows him, having been given the opportunity of relating to what he has said and contradicting it. The second section as well, is divided in two: the preparations (v. 11) and the chase (vv. 12-13). Hushai commences his advice with words that appear at the opening and the conclusion of the structure, 'therefore I counsel',61 in order to make clear to Absalom that heretoforward he will hear the crux of his advice. This opening gambit and the line which he is about to adopt stimulates curiosity because by praising David and his men he is creating a problem for himself: how is he going to be able to plot a way that will enable them to defeat David's regiments? (Bar-Efratl979: 39). Hushai's solution to this problem lies in the stratagem that quantity will ultimately overcome quality (if David has been described as being strong, in the first section—then Absalom is described thus in the second section). A great and mighty host, and not Ahitophel's limited forces, will defeat David and his legions. The mobilizing of a huge army such as this and its organization obviously requires a considerable length of time and this is Hushai's aim: to gain time, in order that David, who will be forced to flee in haste, will succeed in regrouping his forces on the opposite side of the Jordan. This is revealed in different ways virtually in every sentence of his advice. All Israel shall be gathered from Dan even to BeerSheba (v. 11). The introduction to his advice is in direct contrast to Ahitophel's. Ahitophel speaks in terms of choice and pursuit i . Absalom does not play a part at all in what he recommends. 61. Occasionally an incomplete action is described by the speaker as if it were complete. As in Gen. 14.22: 'I have raised'; Jer. 22.5; etc. Gesenius 1960: par. 106: 311-12. Cf. a similar expression in Exod. 18.19; Num. 24.14; Jer. 38.15. LXX second version translates 'That he counsels thus but I counsel', and haplography occurs because of the word 'that- and 'I-' . McCarter 1984. This does not appear to be correct. The word introduces an affirmative phrase and not a clause of reason.

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

205

Hushai in contrast knows how to place himself behind the scenes, so that all the honours will accrue to the glorification of Absalom, the braggart, who will stand at the centre of the action. In order to achieve this he uses the combination 'shall be gathered (the absolute infinitive, singular, in the niphal conjugation, reinforcing the verb), which indicates 'gathering for war' (2 Sam. 13.5; 2 Sam. 23.9; etc.) unto you (whereas in the first part it opens with 'and you'); Absalom will lead the army into battle, the new king at the head of the nation— the whole of Israeli The term is repeated three times during the course of his speech. Prior to this (v. 10) all Israel was aware, whereas here a multitudinous nation, the whole of Israel, will gather (but this will take time) behind Absalom from Dan to Beer-Sheba,62 that is to say the whole of the land of Israel. The following sentence reads 'as the sand that is by the sea for multitude''. Both these phrases are connected in the scriptural tradition when the nation is being blessed and united and the land being one.63 Hushai's words serve as magical incantations to Absalom's soul. He sees in them portents of the establishment of an ideal kingdom in Israel (Zalevski 1981: 178). In the parallel element, at the conclusion of the second structure, we find a number of parallelisms: the verb 'will be gathered ' is identical in the niphal. In the one place it refers to David and in the other to the army of Absalom (therefore with the addition of the absolute infinitive for emphasis). All Israel, which will gather behind Absalom, will surround the city in which David has fortified himself, and with the aid of ropes will drag it into the ravine. In both sentences we find hyperbole: in the first, numerical hyperbole which is reasonable and which serves to impress; in the second, fantastic hyperbole, which serves to ignite the imagination of the audience, so that their enthusiasm will overcome logic. Therefore he says, for example, that the strike will serve as the coup de grace 'and of all the men that are with him there shall not be left so much as one'—complete destruction, in contrast to the wise and passifying conclusion of Ahitophel: 'and all the people should be in peace' (v. 3), and he will smite only one person and that is David alone (v. 2). The language of hyperbole here reaches its apogee (Bar-Efrat 1979: 43), a glorious adornment with which to cover the chinks in the armour (Rost 1926: 125). 62. Seven times in the Bible, five of them in Samuel (3.20 for example), once in Judges and once in Kings. 63. Found in parallel in an additional pivot pattern: 1 Kgs 4.20-5.5.

206

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Hushai also uses images in his counsel, as the sand that is by the sea for multitude (v. 11), an image which frequently indicates the multitude of the people of Israel, but is also used to describe a mighty army which is the case in this instance. It is also the case in many of the books in the Bible.64 In most instances use is made of 'as the sand that is by the sea'. In the first section Hushai speaks of David hiding in some pit or in some other place (v. 9) whereas in the second section of his speech he speaks of David as being65 in some place (v. 12). In the phrase 'some place' no change occurs, and Hushai therefore does not contradict what he has said previously (that it will be impossible to find David in his hiding places). But by deleting 'in some pit' and by adding 'where he shall be found', 'in some place' is explained as not being an undefined place, one of many, but this is the place, come what may, where David will be found, meaning, that it will be possible to find him there. He is not concealed—he is revealed. So shall we come ... and we shall encamp around him like the dew falling on the ground (v. 12)—Image for image. This verb pair is found in Isa. 7.19, 'And they shall come, and shall encamp all of them in the desolate ravines' (also in Judg. 10.14), alluding to the fact that they will come down and cover the place in their multitudes like the infinite sand. The image of the dew (Exod. 16.14; Num. 11.9; Judg. 6.39, 40; Ps. 133.3) suggests that it is impossible to overcome it, as it covers everything beneath it. Attention should be given to what Ahitophel says, 'and / will come upon him' (v. 2), with the verb in the singular, whereas Hushai states, 'so we shall come'—that is all of us. The verb 'will/<2/r, is in contradistinction to 'when some of them fall in the first attack' (v. 9). The verb 'fair indicates a sudden attack, as in Josh. 11.7. The image serves to indicate a silent attack which despite its magnitude 'like sand ... that' ... will fall like dew. If this is so, both these images are situated in parallel in the pivot pattern. I am of the opinion that in the first section the images are taken from the realm of living things (lion-bear) whereas in the second section they are taken from the realm of inanimate things, the land ('like the sand', 'the dew', 'on the ground'), despite the movement which characterizes this section.66 It 64. Genesis, Former Prophets, Latter Prophets and the Writings, e.g. Gen. 22.17; Josh. 11.4; 1 Kgs 5.9. 65. In LXX VV and LV and the Peshitta the words appear as 'he remained'. 66. Conroy (1983: 188) perceives here a symptom of Hushai's deception of Absalom in the unsuitability of the imagery to the subject under discussion.

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

207

indicates the immense size of the army in contradistinction to the valour of the warriors. I am convinced that a large proportion of the phrases that Hushai integrates into his speech are phrases and expressions which were both well known and extensively in use. Some of them are employed in his description of David's way of life while others such as 'from Dan to Beer-sheba', 'like the sand on the sea', 'a melting heart' etc. had gained widespread acceptance. These well-known phrases are used by Hushai to create the impression that what he says is based on recognized and accepted truths. A contention based on language familiar to the listener and which is already accepted by him as tried and tested truths will persuade him with little resistance, and therefore Hushai makes use of sayings, idioms, metaphors and images which are well known and current in order to persuade Absalom.67 Consequently this does not become the climax of the pivot pattern: and that thou go to battle in thine own person (v. II). 68 This expression is found in Exod. 33.14-15: 'and he said, mine own person shall go with thee', 'if thine own person go not with me'—in the dialogue between Moses and the Lord, when the Lord says that he will go in the midst of his people on the way to the land of Canaan. Hushai makes Absalom the central figure (as opposed to Ahitophel): Absalom will himself go at the head of this mighty army, and he will lead it into battle To strengthen the hearts of your men who will see your bravery and their hands will be strengthened and they will put their trust in you when you will be with them in dangerous situations and they will not be expected to endanger themselves alone in the battle ... but Hushai actually believed that if Absalom went into battle and was killed, his death would herald the end of the war and all the nation would be at peace (Ehrlich 1900). 67. Bar-Efrat 1979: 40. Harviainen (1984) finds in Hushai's language linguistic scatter, like (in his opinion): 'and again' (16.19), 'in the midst', 'encamp', 'bring and drag' (four times in the Bible), a multiplicity of 'alsos'. He comes to the conclusion, on the basis of these 'facts' and on the basis of his appellation 'the Arkite', that he was a gentile, and so David made use of his services as he made use of the services of mercenaries such as Cherethites and Pelethites and Ittai the Gittite at their head. 68. In LXX, the Peshitta and the Vulgate—'in its midst . Apparently there is haplography of the waw from the previous word Thus Tur-Sinai (1965) and McCarter (1984). There are those who read 'in their midst', in the midst of all Israel. Thus Conroy (1983) and Harviainen (1984) and others. But in my opinion it is not necessary to change the MT.

208

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Absalom was not a warrior of long standing and, even if the number of soldiers at his disposal was greater than that of David, he would be unable to prevail against seasoned fighters, with a vastly experienced commander in chief, like Joab, as their leader. Hushai exploits Absalom's yearning and his desire, and he aims his words at the lust for greatness, and the excessive self-love of this ambitious prince (cf. BarEfrat 1979: 48). As already mentioned at the beginning of my analysis, I have here competition between two counsellors, both of whom are vying for the favours of this conceited king. An early allusion to this competition is the synchronized and simultaneous entry of the protagonists into Jerusalem (16.15-16). Ahitophel's correct advice, indisputably right from the military point of view, to Absalom, speaks of alacrity of action, a lightning attack. Therefore the sentences are brief, suggesting the pace of the action.69 In contradistinction to this Hushai delivers his speech which is three and a half times as long as Ahitophel's. Contrary to him (Ahitophel) he seeks to delay any action by Absalom, in order that David will have time to muster his forces and to determine the site of the battle (cf. 18.6, 8). Appropriate to this are his utterances which are expansive, ornate, replete with hyperbole and flattery, designed to satisfy the ambitious king who stands before him. In contrast to Ahitophel, Hushai bestows a central role on Absalom, which will lead to his victory with praises heaped upon his head as the victor at the forefront of the nation. There is no doubt that the insinuation of florid speech, gross exaggerations and rhetorical ability captured the heart of Absalom and an enthusiastic nation (cf. inter alia Langlamet 1978: 81) (in contrast to the elders [v. 4] who relied on logical reasoning). Hushai is presented as one who negates the counsel of Ahitophel (15.34). His wisdom and his astuteness prevail ab initio. He makes no mention of the name of the Lord even once throughout his speech (neither does Ahitophel). This notwithstanding, the author tends to imply that Hushai operates in the name, and implements the will of God. In addition to the artistic virtues of the speech, it is built in accordance with a special and unconventional pivot pattern: in contrast to Hushai's initial pronouncements, which subtly and in a considered way reject the sound advice of Ahitophel to Absalom, we find Absalom's utterances expressed in similar style and identical language proving that 69. Cf. 'I will pursue, I will overtake, I will divide the spoil', etc. (Exod. 15.910).

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

209

Hushai has succeeded in his mission to nullify Ahitophel's counsel. This advice is also situated at the centre of the structure, 'Therefore I counsel', as a division between the two sections of his counsel, and which link the commencement and the conclusion pivotally. Each of the sections of the structure, as I have presented them, are designed in the form of a pivot. At the beginning—Absalom's recognition that David and his men are heroes. In parallel to this is the opinion of the whole of Israel that they are indeed heroes. Subsequent to this there occurs the simile of the animals, the lion and the bear, a combination which represents an acceptable paring in Scripture. And at the centre—the climax: the report of the slaughter in Absalom's camp which is liable to bring about his final collapse. In the second section, Hushai emphasizes the increase in the number of warriors. And at the centre the apex of Absalom's glory: 'and that thou go to battle in thine own person', an expression which recalls the Lord going about in the midst of the people of Israel. One can deduce from this that both the climaxes of the pivot patterns in Hushai's speech actually represent its essence: first in order to deter Absolom from launching a sudden nocturnal attack implying the suggestion of a slaughter of the people following Absalom: and secondly in order to delay the battle and to prepare properly so that David would be afforded the opportunity of fleeing to the east bank of the Jordan, of regrouping there and of choosing a suitable site for the battle, he says: and that thou go to battle in thine own person.10 Both the nadir of his fortune, the slaughter, as well as the zenith of his glory, leading his troops into battle, are evidenced here. There is no doubt that amongst the many literary devices which characterize the speech, the pivot pattern is significant and possibly singularly so: in both pivots he strives to emphasize the two possibilities with which Absalom is presented: slaughter or going to battle in his own person. Because he is dictated to by his emotions and not by his reason, and because he is capable only of understanding the superficial, and incapable of deeper comprehension, ('There is no wisdom or understanding or counsel against the 70. This does not appear to me to be part of the pivot structure in Hushai's speech as Bar-Efrat has outlined (1979: 170-72), and particularly the climax. In this structure the climax is parallel in two parts: 'in some other place' (v. 9) and 'in some place' (v. 12). The phrase is actually parallel but what type of climax does this represent, what is its principal idea and what is its contribution to the understanding of the speech?

210

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Lord'—Prov. 21.30), Absalom takes Hushai's words to heart, the very words designed to terrify and deter him from a sudden attack:'And there was there a great slaughter' (18.7). The artistic merits inherent in the speech and in the first pivot pattern at both its climaxes are characteristic of the speech which effectively changes the destiny of David and his kingdom. He paves the way for Absalom, the rebellious son's attack (when he, Absalom, accepts this poor advice), and for the continuation of David's reign which previously was in danger of being lost to his kingdom. The fact that Hushai prevails over Ahitophel in the verbal battle of the counsellors is a precursor to David's victory over Absalom in the field of battle, described in the following chapter. 6. Abishag's Role: The Advice of David's Slaves (1 Kings 1.2)11 A

Let there be sought for my Lord the King, a young maiden and let her stand before the King X and be his attendant B' and let her lie in thy bosom A' that my Lord the King may become warm B

In this verse, that is structured as a pivot pattern, we encounter the advice of David's slaves. In verse one it is stated that David, ageing and infirm, is covered with clothing but nevertheless 'he could not become warm'. Therefore the slaves offer him the following advice: Let there be sought for my Lord the King a young maiden—The advice of the slaves ('and his slaves said to him'), who are certainly close advisors, ministers72 and loyal to the king even concerning the most intimate matters, is reminiscent of the advice of the servants of Saul and Ahasuerus.73 In all these instances the servants of the king fulfil the role of advisors, because the king himself is at a loss (Ehrlich 1900). The parallelisms between these words of advice indicate the physical condition of King David as it is deduced from v. 1, and what occurs between 71. See Fokkelman 1981: 347. 72. Cf. the royal adjective 'the servant of the king' that has been found on seals: 'The servant of the King, Ya'azniahu '; 'Shema servant of Jeroboam'. 73. 'And Saul's servants said to him, Behold now an evil spirit from God is tormenting you ... seek out a man who knows how to play on the lyre' (1 Sam. 16.15-16). 'When the wrath of the king was appeased ... then the king's servants ... let fair young virgins be sought for the king' (Est. 2.1-2). It seems that the book of Esther absorbed this phrase from this narrative.

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

211

these pieces of advice, instruct us about David's physical condition, as indicated in v. 1 and throughout the whole of this episode. When his slaves go forth to find a young girl, and when they bring her back—we do not encounter the reaction of the king. The king does not become active in any way, nor does he assume the initiative.74 However, the servants address David with honour 'my Lord the King',75 a conventional and accepted form of address to the king.76 And even though they are many, the narrator causes them to speak in the singular 'my lord' .71 The servants repeat this title at the conclusion of what they say (the conclusion of the pattern). I learn from this of the great respect which they pay to their king, despite his physical condition. In fact, this is the third time that they address him in the language fit for a king (3 times in a total of 16 words in the original Hebrew!). His slaves suggest that they seek out a young maiden78 who, amongst her other duties, 'will lie in thy bosom', and it is for this reason that they do not bring a married woman. In the parallel hemistich, at the end of the verse, his slaves once again dub him 'my lord the king' using the third person as an indication of respect. And they add that the role of the maiden will be to see to it 'that my lord will become warm' ,79

74. When Saul responds to his servant's suggestion: 'Provide me now a man that can play well' (1 Sam. 16.17); and Ahasuerus: 'And the thing pleased the King and he did so' (Est. 2.4). 75. LXX VV reads 'to the king', and at the conclusion of this verse LXX LV reads 'to the king'. This amendment is unacceptable in that the complete formula—'my lord the king'—is given expression to here. 76. Cf. the words of the woman from Tekoah to David (2 Sam. 14.9) and to the words of Mephibosheth to David (2 Sam. 19.27). And before this, David to Saul (1 Sam. 26.17). Even the approach of king (from an inferior position as a vassal) to king: Ahab to Ben-Hadad (1 Kgs 20.4). 77. Accordingly there is a correction in LXX 'to our lord the king', and in chs. 1 and 2 in the story of the conflict over the inheritance, the phrase 'lord' recurs. 78. A noun followed by a noun in apposition. As in: 'and became an archer' (Gen. 21.20); 'woman-widow' (1 Kgs 7.14). Cf. the connection with the Rebecca narrative: 'And the girl was very fair to look upon, a virgin, neither had any man known her' (Gen. 24.16). And in this section of the text 'And the maiden was very fair (4) a virgin, and the king had no intimacy with her' (v. 4). 79. Cf. 'Again, if two lie together then they have warmth, but how can one be warm alone?' (Eccl. 4.11).

212

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Attention should be given to the fact that in v. 1 it is stated 'but he could not become warm'.80 Therefore there is need to bring a young maiden 'that my lord the king may become warm' and that as a result of this action it will no longer be stated 'and she made him warm' or something similar, but 'and the king had no intimacy with her'. From amongst the duties of the maiden, in the opinion of the counsellors, the one mentioned first is and let her stand before the king—as a slave stands before his master, to serve him. This combination usually occurs with the meaning of serving (cf. Ehrlich 1900; 1 Sam. 16.22; 2 Kgs 5.16; and many other examples). In fact, in v. 4 we find 'and she attended the king' as a parallel to 'and let her stand before the king'. This indicates, too, that she belonged to the royal group (the royal court), as well as to its servants (1 Sam. 16.21; 1 Kgs 1.28; 2 Kgs 5.15). The example is highlighted within this context because within the sections of the text which deal with it the verb 'serves ' also appears frequently (Deut. 10.8; 2 Chron. 29.11; cf. Num. 16.9), and in this chapter in v. 4 in the parallel hemistich (the fourth line) it is said about the maiden and let her lie in thy bosom. Even if I had not found a word pair 'stand-lie' in Scripture, it would have been abundantly clear that I am confronted by words which express antitheses. This is proved by the following pair words. 1.

2.

He couched, he lay down i like a lion and like a great lion: who shall stir him up (Num. 24.9). from where he lies he shall rise up no more (Ps. 41.9).81 then the waters which came down from above stood and rose up in a heap very far (Josh. 3.16). The young men saw me and hid themselves and the aged arose, and stood up (Job 29.8).

Because the words lie-arise constitute a word pair as does arisestand, we can interchange between these word pairs and produce the word pair lie-stand in parallel to them, as they occur in this structure. The change in person (second person singular) is worthy of note in that everything else said to the king is written in the third person masculine singular, which is the language of respect. Therefore the LXX 80. And this verse is outside of the structure in that it includes the words of the narrator. The structure contains only the words of the servants. 81. And cf. Gen. 19.33, 35; Deut. 6.7, 11.19; Isa. 43.17; Job 7.4.

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

213

and the Vulgate have altered the text to read 'and she shall lie in his bosom, with him'.82 This, however, is unacceptable, in that a change of person from third person masculine singular to second person masculine singular was accepted in ancient spoken Hebrew83 (and thus in 1 Sam. 25.28; 1 Kgs 1.20, 2.38). Even more so, prior to this the servants were in doubt with regard to the acceptance of their suggestion and spoke in terms of 'standing' in the third person. But in what follows they became somewhat more daring. They change both verb and person. The expression is taken from the realm of marriage, in which the woman is known as 'the wife of his bosom' (Deut. 13.7) or 'her that lies in your bosom' (Mic. 7.5).84 But it is not the intention of the text to indicate that Avishag was chosen for this purpose, because it is stated categorically that the suggestion of the ministers was predicated on the reality that the clothes which covered David no longer warmed him. And that the role of the maiden was defined specifically not as that of a wife or a concubine, but as one who would 'be his attendant'. Her duty was to warm the body of the king, and the expression is apparently devoid of any sexual connotation. It is interesting to note that in the description of the implementation of the suggestion (4) it is not stated that she lay in his bosom, but 'and she attended the king and ministered to him'. The suggestion was only partially realized. Apparently, therefore, Abishag was neither his wife nor even his concubine, but she was David's attendant (cf. Kaufmann 82. According to Zalevski (1981: 124 n. 35) they also changed the verb: Koi^iTi6f|0eTca neT'ccvcou 83. Keil-Delitzsch 1965; Burney 1970b. Malbim has another explanation: he says that they should have announced that they were seeking a virgin to serve the king, because it is not moral to say that she should lie in his bosom. 84. So with the episode of the poor man's lamb it is stated with regard to the relationship of the man to his lamb: 'And lay in his bosom, and was like a daughter to him' (2 Sam. 12.3). Attention should be given to the link with this section of the text: 'And be his attendant and let her lie in thy bosom.' There is an organo-thematic connection between Nathan's reproach of David regarding the sin of Bathsheba and the punishments that awaited him in the future. Cf. Garsiel 1983: 23. Accordingly it is possible to add the words of our sages of blessed memory: 'Rabbi Yossi the son of Hanina said: all those who despise clothing are destined never to derive benefit from clothes. 'And secretly cut off the corner of Saul's robe' (1 Sam. 24.5) so 'they covered him with clothes but he could not become warm (1 Kgs 1.1) (PRE 80.43). The punishment is made to fit the crime. Carlson (1964) links this section of the text with other parts of the text in which the verb 'lie' is mentioned, e.g., in the story of David's succession (2 Sam. 11.4, 12.5 and others).

214

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

1966: 176). And the expression lay in the bosom indicates an act of possession, the acquiring of rights, as occurs in the episode with Sarah, Hagar and Abraham (Gen. 16.5) (Zalevski 1981: 126). At the climax of the pivot pattern it is stated that the maiden is intended to 'be his attendant'. What is the reason for 'and be his attendant' being situated at the centre of the pivot pattern? There is no doubt that the answer is connected to the function of the pericope (vv. 1-4) in the chapter, and in which the verse under discussion appears. That is to say an introduction to and an explanation of Adonijah's request to Abishag and his subsequent elimination, on the orders of Solomon. Abishag's position is of such significance in the understanding of the conflict between them that her role is described in great detail. As we have seen, from what is described, Abishag is neither David's concubine nor his wife, but obviously was a part of his harem, being so close to the king. In fact her role (or her status) is not exactly clear,85 and is expressed by the term 'attendant', applied exclusively in Scripture to a woman.86 But according to the text 'and the king had no intimacy with her' it is therefore clear that she was free, and did not have the status of a wife (Zalevski 1981: 128) and this creates an intentional confusion. Not everybody knew that she was only an attendant, and Adonijah sought to create the impression that she was the king's wife or his concubine. In any event Solomon is portrayed in a negative light, because he exploited the opportunity presented by Adonijah's request to cause it to be rejected. But possibly the author, whose sympathy lies with the house of David and of Solomon here, intentionally blurs both the role and the status of Abishag, even though 'the king had no intimacy with her'. The essence of his request was to acquire 'one who lies in the bosom' of David (as a suggestion and not as a reality). Adonijah 85. Thus also Burney 1970b, and also Ishida (1987: 168). Gray (1964) maintains that she was his concubine. 86. The word 'attendant ' is mentioned only on one other occasion in the Bible: 'Go get thee to this attendant ... who is over the house' (Isa. 22.15). In accordance with this it has the meaning also of concern, caring for and looking after all that happens within the boundaries of the house (the palace). Cf. Fen ton 1968: 1046. In the inscription from Limasol, from the eighteenth century BCE, the follow ing is mentioned '[...] good the attendant, Kartahdashath, who is known also by the name as the servant of Hiram'.

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

215

provides evidence of his intention, that he desired to acquire the kingdom by using her.87 As Solomon said to his mother, 'And why dost thou ask Abishag the Shunnamite for Adonijah? Ask for him the kingdom also' (2.22). And therefore he was murdered, because Solomon's kingdom 'was his from the Lord' (2.15). The relationships between Adonijah and Solomon in 1 Kings 1-2 are expressed in a twofold question: was Adonijah's demand naive, and did it flow from his genuine love for the beautiful Abishag, or did he exploit her in order to seek the kingdom? Possibly the answer to the question is connected to the expression 'and be his attendant', which is situated at the centre of the pivot pattern under discussion. 7. Summary In this chapter I have analysed structures whose central concern is persuasion which finds its expression in the form of a request, a prayer or counsel. Apparently, together with structures whose concern is decree and implementation, it is reasonable to anticipate that the abovementioned structures will be designed in accordance with the pivot pattern (even though there are many examples of advice, prayers and attempts at persuasion in Scripture that do not conform to this specific type of pattern), because the speaker, in order to prevail upon his interlocutor, will frequently duplicate what he says either in identical language, or in language similar to that already used, and on many occasions this is done in inverted order which creates the pivot pattern. This duplication of words expressed as it is in the pivot pattern has a practical purpose as its object. The speeches, even the shortest amongst them (and the majority of the structures dealt with in this chapter fall into this category), represent, by virtue of their characteristics, typical situations in which the art of persuasion is exploited in order to assuage an adversary through peaceful means, and its ultimate objective is to tip the scales in favour of a particular standpoint by means of politico-social negotiations, and to curry favour with the auditor (see Dozeman 1992: 712-15). Therefore in order to impress and emphasize, many of them are structured in the form of a pivot pattern. 87. Cf. Saul's concubine Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah, Abner and Ishbosheth (2 Sam. 3.7) and Absalom had relations with his father's concubines (2 Sam. 16.22).

216

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

I therefore find that the majority of the utterances and speeches in this chapter bear fruit and the one addressed is convinced by what is said. A shining example of this is the extended oration of Hushai, which succeeds in winning Absalom over and nullifying Ahitophel's counsel. The pivot pattern serves to stress the pronouncements and their climax. It is interesting that in four of the structures (of a total number of five) the kernel of the request is not situated at the centre, at the climax of the structure. So we find three examples in which the rationalization for the request or for the prayer is situated at the apex (2 Sam. 13.3233; 2 Kgs 5.18; 2 Kgs 19.15-19). The request itself occurs at the wings of the climax of the structure. The pattern containing Hushai's speech differs completely, in that it is composed of two structures with a link between them. It is only in the address of the servants to David (1 Kgs 1.2) where we find a request whose climax is at the centre of the pattern. In the majority of the instances (in three structures) the approach is to the king, in which his subjects request something from him, or attempt to convince him of something, or to the prophet (to Elisha-2 Kgs 5.18), or in a prayer to the Lord (Hezekiah), which in fact is in the realm of a request or petition. The words serve as a means whereby the weak defend themselves against the strong, or gain favour from his decree. It is no wonder, then, that the language used is characteristic of, and common to, the speaker. He suits his speech to him who is above him in status. He uses words which are flattering to his superior, to the king or to the prophet (my lord, my lord the king, your servant), which occur in parallel elements of the pivot pattern, in order to pacify or quell his anger. Even Na'aman, the commander-in-chief of the army of Aram, demeans himself with the appellation 'your servant' before Elisha. In the majority of the structures, one character is presented whose request is in pivot form, and the response of his auditor appears subsequently, but outside of the pivot structure, precisely as in those structures in which there is a decree alone, and where the description of its implementation falls outside of the pattern. Acceding to the requestsuggestion, which is included in the pattern, occurs only in the structure where Hushai's suggestion receives favourable acceptance from Absalom ([2 Sam. 17.7-14]—in the final verse only). This acceptance appears in the structure itself, which is explicable, or so it would appear to me, as a result of the desire of the narrator to stress that even if

5. Patterns of Request, Prayer and Proposal

217

Hushai's mission was extremely complex (because of Ahitophel's sound advice and the status which he enjoyed), he succeeded in impressing Absalom, and he in turn accepted his suggestion. The speaker who seeks something (or prays for something) from his auditor attempts to convince him by his words, and tries to arrive at a conclusion based on what he says (occasionally by means of the words 'and now In the majority of the structures the request is presented in its entirety, and is accepted. Only the words of Na'aman to Elisha (2 Kgs 5) are presented in part in the pattern, and the main thrust of what he says falls outside of it. I virtually do not encounter the narrator's words within these patterns, with the exception of certain formulaic introductions ('and Hushai said', 'and Absalom said', for example).

Chapter 6

PIVOTAL PATTERNS IN OTHER GENRES

1. Introduction I have already indicated in the introduction to this work that pivotal patterns reflect a literary tradition which is not confined to prose. Pivotal patterns are found in other biblical literary genres in which the seminal idea, or at least the turning point of the unit, is located at the core or centre of the symmetric presentation. The purpose of this brief appendix is to show that there is widespread use of these patterns in other genres and it is appropriate therefore to apply the research methodology employed in the work generally to the following genres as well. I have chosen four examples among many1 to demonstrate the pivotal pattern in other biblical genres: from biblical law:

the law of the blasphemer and the law of the murderer (Lev. 24.13-23) from biblical prophecy: Amos's reproof regarding the holy places of Judaea and Israel (Amos 5.4-6) from psalmic literature: the fate of the wicked (Ps. 12.4-5) from genealogical lists: the Chronicler's preface to the listing of the sons of Reuben (1 Chron. 5.1-3)

2. The Law of the Blasphemer and the Law of the Murderer (Leviticus 24.13-23) This pivot pattern2 interweaves two separate laws: the law of the blasphemer and the law of the murderer. Actually a literary component in 1. Additional examples are from: legal literature (Lev. 11.24-28; Num. 5.1920, 21-22); prophetic literature (Isa. 52.8-9; Zech. 9.5); poetic literature (Ps. 67.2-8; 104.8-10). 2. Cf. Lund 1930: 119-21; Wenham 1988. See vv. 16-22 for concentric design.

6. Pivotal Patterns in Other Genres

219

the form of a narrative framework is appended here (vv. 13-14, 23),3 linked with the narrative of the blasphemer (vv. 10-12).4 But these verses are not included in this structure.5 A And the Lord said unto Moses saying B Bring forth him that hath blasphemed outside the camp, and let all that heard him lay their hands upon his head and let all the congregation stone him C And thou shalt speak to the children of Israel saying D Whoever curses his God shall bear his sin E And he who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him, both the stranger and he that is born in the land, when he blasphemes the name of the Lord shall he be put to death F And he that kills any man shall surely be put to death (a life for a life) G And he that kills a beast shall make it good (a life for a life) H And if a man maim his neighbour; as he has done, so shall it be done to him X A breach for a breach, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth H' As he has maimed a man so it shall be done to him G' And he that kill a beast, he shall restore it F' And he that kills a man he shall be put to death E' You shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger as for he that is born in the land D' Because I am the Lord your God C And Moses spoke to the children of Israel B' And they brought him that had blasphemed out of the camp, and stoned him with stones A' And the children of Israel did as the Lord commanded Moses

(v. 13) (v. 14)

(v. 15) (v. 16)

(v. 17) (v. 18) (v. 19)

(v. 20) (v. 21) (v. 22)

(v. 23)

I can infer that the essence of the narrative is not structured as a pivot pattern, and the dovetailing of the statutes within a framework is in the form of the decree and implementation genre. The narrative framework in its entirety (vv. 10-13, 23) is built, at first sight, like an independent narrative. Possibly, however, it is nothing 3. Cf. Noth 1964; Galil 1987: 177. 4. The frame narrative is very similar in form and content to the story of the gatherer of wood (Num. 15.32-36). Cf. Noth 1964; Galil 1987: 176-77. 5. The Massoretes had already divided vv. 10-12 from vv. 13-23 in an open section

220

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

more than a section of the episode dealing with law, and its presentation is intended to serve as a narrative tale which anticipates the statute enveloped within it.6 The structure opens with a formulaic introduction which is acceptable prior to statements in direct speech, and here it precedes the verdict,7 'And the Lord spoke unto Moses saying', and concluding with the words: 'And the children of Israel did as the Lord commanded Moses.' I have found this in other locations too (Exod. 12.50, 16.34) and particularly Lev. 8.36, 16.34, where it finds its expression as it does in this section of the text, the distinction between the language of the decree, 'And the Lord spoke unto Moses' (8.1; 17.1), and the language of implementation, 'and did as he had commanded' (Lev. 8.4; cf. Jer. 13.3-5 as well). The word of the Lord is a decree and this conclusion serves to create a parallel with the commencement and to complete the pivot pattern. In the second element we find the verdict presented to Moses as a decree. Sentence of death by stoning must be carried out without the camp of Israel, as is the case with other sentences of death described in Scripture (Achan-in the valley of Achor, 7.24-26). This is also the case with the implementation of the sentence of death against Naboth, where it is stated: Then they carried him outside of the city, and stoned him with stones, that he died' (1 Kgs 21.13). The parallelism between the decree and its implementation (elements B-B1) is clear. Indeed the word 'congregation' is not reiterated in the description of the implementation, because the children of Israel have already been mentioned, and the word 'stone' is not mentioned in the decree, but only in the implementation thereof, in order to stress the act of stoning. But it is evident that this omission is characteristic of the elliptical style of Scripture, which relies on the reader's ability to comprehend. Possibly this is the reason why the issue of the laying-on of the hands is not repeated in the implementation. The laying of hands on the head of the transgressor is not stated in other instances of people sentenced to death, but only in the case of a blasphemer. Those who hear the blasphemy are compelled to lay their hands on the head of the one come to judgment, because on the strength of their evidence he will

6. Cf. Noth in his commentary (1965); Galil 1987: 177. 7. The fifth stage of the story. Cf. the components of the narrative in Galil 1987: 176-77.

6. Pivotal Patterns in Other Genres

221

be executed, as it is written: 'the hand of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hands of all the people' (Deut. 17.7). The incident involving the blasphemer provides an opportunity to proclaim other statutes that will not be of a temporary nature but will serve for generations to come. For this reason there is an additional formulaic opening in the element C: 'And thou shalt speak to the children of Israel saying'. In element C we find a parallel formula: 'And Moses spoke to the children of Israel.' But this does not complete the former formula, but constitutes an introduction to the implementation of the verdict. And in the parallel elements there is a dovetailing of two components, which are mentioned at the beginning of the analysis: the anthology of laws and the literary framework. Element D—'Whoever curses his God, shall bear his sin'8—introduces the series of statutes and links it with the narrative framework. However, in fact it deviates somewhat from the structure in that it does not have a clear cut parallel, other than (in D1) the divine name 'his God' in parallel with '(because I am) the Lord your God'. Element D recalls 'Thou shalt not revile the Lord, nor curse the ruler of thy people' (Exod. 22.27). In the parallel element God is mentioned, which is sacred language and not profane: 'I am the Lord your God', a phrase which is reiterated frequently in the portion 'Kedoshim' (Lev. 19) in the promise of reward and punishment (Lev. 19.10). It occurs here to give emphasis to the authoritative weight of he who issues the command—I am the Lord your God, and it is proper that you should uphold my commandments—and also to give a reason for having 'one manner of law'. At the centre of the law of the blasphemer, we find two elements, E and E'. Common to both of these is the expression 'as well for the 8. 'Shall bear his sin', without indicating what the punishment will be. There are those who explain that this means that he will not die unless he mentions the ineffable name (Sank. 56a). According to the plain sense of the text this commentary is not correct: quite the opposite. The text's intention is to establish the punishment of the one who curses as stoning, as indicated in v. 14, and this is confirmed in v. 16 by a minori ad mains: if one who takes the name of the Lord (in vain, as explained in Exod. 20.7) merits sentence of death, then how much more so he who takes the name of the Lord and blasphemes it as the curser does. Cf. Galil 1987: 177.

222

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

stranger, as for he that is born in the land '. The element E is more comprehensive than element E', and describes the law governing he who 'blasphemes the Lord'. E1 reiterates and clearly emphasizes that there is to be no distinction between strangers and citizens.9 The duplication of the 'as i >' of comparison, 'as for the stranger, as for one of your own country', occurs in order to stress that they are equal. And this is one of the aims of the corpus of law.10 As it is stated in element E, that there is no distinction between the one of your country and the stranger, if they blaspheme the Lord, so it is emphasized that this distinction does not exist in the other statutes either. Both are obligated to refrain from any affront to God: and both are prohibited from taking the name of the Lord in vain. Therefore a minori ad maius—to curse him. The corpus of law at the centre of the structure (cf. Harrison 1980: 222; Venham 1988: 311-12) which is presented in a series of seven groups, which include injury inflicted on man by his fellow-man and damage caused to the property of another. These are interlinked in vv. 10-23 in which the affront and the cursing of God are also discussed.11 Possibly the link in the text between these laws exists because in vv. 10-16 there is a discussion on men who strive one with the other (v. 10) and here the question of striking is debated (vv. 17, 21). Ibn Ezra explains the contiguity of these two issues, the one who strikes and the one who curses, because possibly those who were striving together struck one another (cf. the Hizkuni). And there are those who maintain that these laws are connected because of the iterative phrase 'as for the stranger, as for one of your own country' (vv. 16, 22) (Noth 1964: 180). The laws concerning the one who strikes commences with the law of the murderer: 'And he that kills any man shall surely be put to death1. This complements what is written in Exod. 21.12 in which it is established, on the one hand, that the murderer will be put to death only on 9. A citizen in this verse is one of the children of Israel whose origin is pure Israelite, in contrast to the stranger > who is not included in the people of Israel or is a semi-alien but attached to the people of Israel, for example the son of the Egyptian who is mentioned in the frame narrative. 10. To emphasize this idea possibly the phrase 'Both the stranger and the citizen' is added and is interwoven in the pivot pattern and possibly it too is connected to the frame narrative (cf. Galil 1987). 11. 'And the Israelite woman's son took the name of the Lord ... and cursed' (11); 'Bring forth him that cursed' (14); 'and they brought him that cursed' (23).

6. Pivotal Patterns in Other Genres

223

condition that he is a man, that is, he has reached majority and is no longer a minor. On the other hand, where the victim is concerned, the murderer is liable for the death penalty irrespective of whether he (the victim) is an adult or a child (Hoffman 1959). And the phrase 'A life for a life' in hemistich G should appear here, after the words 'shall surely be put to death', and it has been deleted erroneously (see below). In hemistich G we encounter the case of the killing of an animal: 'And he that kills a beast12 shall make it good a life for a life' (v. 18). It is customary to explain the waw in the Hebrew version of this verse as the adversative waw—but he who kills an animal. In the laws concerning the ox in the portion—Mishpatim (Exod. 21.28-36) it is the ox which gores that is discussed whereas here we have a discussion of a man who kills an ox. The text juxtaposes the laws regarding the killing of a man in order to stress the prohibition on killing or injuring a fellow human being, (The life of) a beast is intentionally presented here in contradistinction to (the life of) a man , in that the killing of a beast merely involves a liability for monetary compensation, calculated according to its value, and in accordance with the extent of the damage caused, whereas in a case of murder the death sentence is mandatory, considering the ascendancy of man (over beast), who was created in the image of God (Gen. 9.6) (Hoffman 1959). Therefore the law of a life for a life does not actually apply in the case of an animal. It would seem that these words are not intended to apply to an animal, but exclusively to man.13 There is an error in the text, as mentioned above, and the expression 'a life for a life' should come after 'shall surely be put to death' (in element F) and for some reason it has been placed beyond its proper location. The text should therefore read: 'And he that kills any man shall surely be put to death, a life for a life, and he that kills a beast shall make it good'. The textual aberration (in Galil's opinion, 1987: 177) serves to indicate that there is an order in the recording of the laws which are ab initio, each law being accorded its own line of the text. The words 'a life for a life', which were originally in the top line, were

12. The word 2JDD is omitted in LXX, and the words 'and dies' are added after the word 'beast', but there is no necessity for this. 13. Ibn Ezra explains that the phrase 'serves both verses', and thus Abarbanel; Noth 1965: 180. This explanation is totally unacceptable.

224

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

copied initially between that line and the line beneath it, and subsequently were transcribed, erroneously, with the second line, that is with hemistich G. It is worth commenting that as far as the structure is concerned this change is not obligatory, because there is no parallel to this phrase neither in the parallel hemistich G' nor in the hemistich F (but it does occur in the central hemistich). But the assumption that there is an error must be accepted, in that 'a life for a life' applies exclusively to man and not to beast. At the conclusion of the laws concerning one who kills, parallels occur to the two hemistichoi F and G, in order to reinforce the issue in a somewhat abbreviated form: In contrast to element it is stated in

F: and he that kills any F: that kills

man shall surely man

be put to death (v. 20) 14 be put to death.

In contrast to hemistich G: and he that kills a beast shall make it good (a life for a life) 15 it is stated in G': and he that kills a beast, he shall restore it.

(v. 21)

The similarity is obvious: the word nefesh is deleted in the elements F1 and G' and I deduce from this that injury to an animal is being discussed (in contrast to the killing of an animal in v. 18, cf Rashi) or striking, which ultimatey leads to death (see Exod. 21.19) while in v. 17 the discussion concerns direct killing (Hoffman 1959). The second obvious difference involves the severity of the punishment: in F' concerning man, it is stated 'he shall be put to death' and not 'he shall surely be put to death1 (v. 17) as would be the case with all those sentenced to death by the ecclesiastical court (regarding an animal it is not stated [in v. 21, as opposed to v. 18] 'a life for a life', which does not belong here, as I have already indicated). At the centre of the structure, in three elements, we find 'measure for measure' formulated in a lucid way: In element H:

And if a man maim his neighbour done to him

In element H':

As he has maimed a man

as he has done so shall it be

so it shall be done to him

(v. 19) (v. 20)

14. The words 'a man [that he dies he will surely] be put to death' are added in LXX. Bertholet (1901) accepts this version as a type of summary. 15. This element is omitted in LXX, perhaps because it separates and divides 'so he maims a man' and 'he that kills a man'. Possibly this is added in order to complete the chiastic heptastich and the pivot pattern.

6. Pivotal Patterns in Other Genres

225

Apparently the plain meaning of the scriptural text16 is that he who maimed his fellow-man was punished by being maimed in return, measure for measure (cf. Porter 1976). But there are those who contend that the expression 'as he has done so shall it be done to him' should not be understood in accordance with its obvious meaning, as it is possible to deduce from Samson's declaration:17 'as they did unto me so did I unto them'. This does not mean that he did precisely what was done to him (the kidnapping of his wife), but rather that he did damage to them in reprisal for what was done to him (the scorching of their fields). Hereto the intention is not to do to the transgressor what he has done to another, but rather to punish him in a way which will fit the crime that he has committed. If the phenomenon of measure for measure in the light of a particular action ('will maim') occurs in these two hemistichoi, then at the climax of the pattern, I find only measure for measure: 'a breach for a breach, an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth'. I find a similar version, if somewhat more extended, in Exod. 21.2324, and a further version, though not identical, in Deut. 19.21. The original meaning of this law was, apparently, as stated, in accordance with the ancient tenet known in Roman law as the Lex Talionis, that is: the punishment is to fit the crime exactly, a precise measure for measure in accordance with the exact meaning of the term.18 Let us examine the centre of the structure concerning the law of the murderer. The verse 'and he that kills a beast' apparently, at first glance, should not be located here, as initially it is assumed that this section deals with the laws of a murderer, 'he who kills a man shall die', whereas he who damages a limb is punished. Subsequently it is stated 'and he that kills a beast shall restore it', and, if this is so, then what is stated initially 'and he that kills a beast' is redundant. Therefore there is a pause, indicating that heretoforward pecuniary compensation is under discussion, that even he who kills a beast is liable only to recompense its owner monetarily. The text then proceeds 16. Our sages established that there is no compensation other than money. Rabbi Ishmael learnt that from the redundancy in 'it will be given in it'. Thus Venham 1988: 312. 17. Judg. 15.11. Rasag says thus to Ben Zuta in his introduction to the long commentary by Ibn Ezra. 18. Our sages (B. Qam. 8a) explained by way of hermeneutics: an eye for an eye-money. This is how Jacob explains it (1929) and Cassuto (1965: 191-93).

226

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

to repeat the difference between one who causes damage to his fellow man, and one who causes damage to a beast, and therefore it is stated a second time 'and he who smites a beast ' (Malbim). Attention should be given to the fact, that subsequent to dealing with the law of he who maims a man, the punishment for the maiming of a beast is not placed in contradistinction, because the difference with reference to a human being between 'smites him (meaning 'murders him') and 'maims him', is an essential difference (the death penalty as against monetary compensation), whereas with a beast the difference between he who slays the animal and he who merely maims it is quantitative: a large sum of money as against a lesser sum of money (in accordance with the extent of the damages) (Leibovich 1983: 398). This section concludes with the positioning of (v. 21) and he that kills a beast, he shall restore it and he that kills a man, he shall be put to death

placed one against the other so that it would seem, at first glance, that the repetition of the verse is no more than an iteration of what has already been stated. But with the exception of the differences (that we have already dealt with) between the elements, apparently, this serves to indicate the distinction between man's responsibility towards the property of his neighbour and his responsibility towards the life of his fellow-man, created as he is in the divine image (Leibovich 1983: 397), and this concludes this section of the text. It would seem, too, that the verse serves to complete the pivot pattern and to bring the number of the laws to seven (Galil 1987). The issue becomes clear at the climax of the pattern: a breach for a breach, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth (v. 20). The location of the law of measure for measure at the climax of the pivot pattern serves to indicate that it is just and correct: as he has done, so it shall be done to him, a breach for a breach, an eye for an eye. Despite the dovetailing of the laws in this excerpt, the laws are in fact listed from the more serious to the less serious: from the prohibition on affronting the honour of God, the text moves to the prohibition on damages caused to man and finally to beast. It becomes clear that scriptural law (as is the case with law generally in the Ancient East), which is subject to various literary and stylistic patterns, is occasionally structured pivotally, and this is the case with this section of the text, as well as in Lev. 11.24-28 (cf. Zakovitch 1979: 536).

6. Pivotal Patterns in Other Genres

227

3. Amos's Reproof Regarding the Holy Places of Judaea and of Israel (Amos 5.4-6) A

Seek me and you shall live: But do not seek Beth el C nor enter into Gilgal X and do not pass to Beer-sheba; C' for Gilgal shall surely go into exile B' and Beth-el shall come to nought: A1 Seek the Lord, and live B

(v. 4) (v. 5)

(v. 6)

This pivot pattern constitutes an episode (vv. 4-6),19 in which the prophet calls to the children of Israel to seek the Lord instead of turning to the sites of ritual ceremony. The episode is linked to the episode prior to it (vv. 1-3) by a call to the house of Israel (vv. 1, 4) as well as by an introductory formula 'For thus says the Lord' (vv. 3, 4), but different from it, in that the call for life ('seek me and you shall live') is different from the lament (v. I).20 After the formulaic opening to the words of the Lord, the following is stated in his name: 'Seek me and you shall live' (v. 4). Two linked imperatives occur here, and the relationship between them is one of a demand and its outcome and a demand with the promised compensation.21 A similar combination occurs in 2 Kgs 5.13, 'Bathe yourself and be purified', and particularly in Gen. 42.8, 'Do this and live', in other words, in order that you shall live, that you shall remain alive. This explanation applies even to v. 14 in this chapter: 'Seek good... that you may live.' The true sense of the word 'seek ' here, is to seek the Lord in 22 order to know him, the execution of the divine will in general, as it is 19. Weiss (1992) includes the whole of v. 6 in the chiastic structure, when he to Then the changes (in accordance with LXX) the word whole unit is included in the structure, but the final element includes a number of sentences, while all the other elements are brief, containing one sentence. It is worthy of note that Lund (1930) already dwelt on this pivot pattern (p. 108). 20. Cf. De Waard (1977: 172) who also gave attention to the pivotal structure in this episode. 21. Harper 1905, as well as Hesse 1956: 4, Neubauer 1966: 309 and Hammershaimb 1970: 78. Paul (1991) perceives the key word 'seek' as a terminus technicus comprising a number of connotations in ancient literature referring to the divine. 22. Buber 1961: 108. Cf. the parallel between in Deut. 4.29, Ps. 24.6.

228

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

stated, for example, in Ps. 14.2, 'The Lord looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that understood and sought God', and not only an approach to God with intercession from the prophet (Rosel 1990). The interpretation of 'he sought the Lord' is: to be with him with constancy, and to live in accordance with his will; perpetually (as in Isa. 9.12, 55.6; Hos. 10.12 etc. See Weiss 1992). In the final element of the pattern which is parallel to the first, the prophet declares, this time in his own words, in the third person, speaking about the Lord, and not using the Lord's words, in language which strikes a personal chord 'Seek the Lord, and live' (v. 6). That is to say: seek him, return to him (cf. Isa. 9.12), because merely going up to the holy centres does not lead to identification with the Lord. Here the intention of the prophet is to emphasize the call of the Lord, which occurs prior to this ('seek me and live') in order to demonstrate the covert connotation within, in a tangible way, and he therefore links it with a punishment ('lest he break out like fire') and not simply a prohibition or a warning of punishment to come. Apparently, the Lord's reproof is clarified by Amos himself in the continuation of his prophecy: 'Seek good and not evil that you may live'—'Hate the evil, and love the good, and establish justice in the gate' (vv. 14-15). Amos demands from his compatriots pure moral living that expresses itself through justice and righteousness, qualities which are being ignored by the people, and not pilgrimage to the places of ritual ceremony for the purpose of making sacrifices, as stated in 4.4. This demand by Amos, both at the commencement and the conclusion of the pattern, constitutes the central idea in the section. Subsequent to the prophet's presentation of God's genuine demand, and the promised recompense for its fulfilment 'Seek me and you shall live\ he proceeds to its negative antithesis and opens a series of negatives with the words 'But do not seek'23 and not with the name of the city. And this stands out against the background of the following elements (the third—the sixth) in which the prophet commences (in the original Hebrew) with the name of the city, in order to emphasize the

23. Zakovitch (1979: 417) and Paul (1991) perceive a similarity of sound between the word (which replaces the word in the following hemistich) and the word and maintain that the use of the negative imperative is characteristic of the wisdom literature (cf. Prov. 4.5-6, 9.8, 19.18, etc.).

6. Pivotal Patterns in Other Genres

229

significance of its influence on their activities or on the punishment for them. In the second element the prophet cries out: 'But do not seek Beth-el (v. 5)'. Amos here, uses the same radical in order to contrast with what is said prior to this, but with a different meaning: turning to go in the direction of a holy place (as it is written in Deut. 12.5: 'But to the place which the Lord your God shall choose ... and there shall you seek him ... there shalt thou come'), meaning 'do not turn to walk in the way', which is parallel to 'thou shalt come"1 in the latter part of the verse.24 The prophet maintains thereby that they should not visit the holy place, because the place itself is not endowed with a sanctity that will be able to protect them. In the perception of the prophet therefore there is a crucial contradiction between 'seeking Beth-el' and 'seeking ' the Lord. In the third element, an additional city is mentioned: 'nor enter into GilgaV. These two cities, Beth-el and Gilgal, are mentioned together25 in 4.4, in 1 Sam. 7.15-17, in the context of Samuel's peregrinations, and in 2 Kings 2-4, in the description of the journeys of Elijah and Elisha. Possibly the choice among the many cities of ritual worship26 gave rise to the opportunity of portraying their fate in the following elements based on an etymological examination of their names, and to allude to the fate of all the remaining ritual centres in the kingdom as well.27 24. Weiss (1992) sees an additional reason for the use of an identical verb in adjacent elements: the people understood 'seek me' as ritual worship, which they perform, and an outcome which has been promised to them. They do not only trust in him but also are confident of him. The reading that follows which is , i.e. 'but', 'but do not seek Beth-el', astonishes them. This is contrary to what they thought and their amazement prevails in what follows. 25. Possibly to see a midrashic name derivation in the words 'do not come which alludes to 26. Garsiel (1987: 131) is of the opinion that the drawing together of Beth-el and Gilgal stems not only from their existence as ritual centres but also from geographical, demographical and transport links. 27. This method of choosing certain cities because of the possibilities embodied in their name is accepted by the prophet. See Amos 6.13: 'You who rejoice in a thing of nought [an allusion to the city "Lo Dabar"] who say have we not taken to us horns by our own strength' (horns are a symbol of strength and here allude to the city of the same name). Midrashic name derivations concerning cities with allusion to their destiny is a well-accepted convention in classical prophetic literature, see Mic. 1.10-15; Isa. 10.28-32; Zeph. 2.4.

230

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

In the parallel elements, numbers 5 and 6, the prophet reacts to the outcome of the people's entry into Beth-el and to Gilgal, by analysing the etymological aspects of the names which gives concrete expression to the fate of the cities themselves. In the sixth element parallel to the second, the prophet says: 'And Beth-el shall come to nought' (v. 5). The place will not be the house of God (cf. Gen. 28.17-19) but a house of vanity and nothingness (as it is translated in LXX and the Peshitta, and cf. Isa. 41.29), a house of evil (cf. the evildoers in Ps. 101.8). And because it was also the site of Jereboam's sanctuary, it is described in more severe terms with regard to its punishment (than Gilgal). The midrashic name derivation of the name Beth-e/ in the word 'Oh1 is apparently in the light of the second name of the place of worship Beth-on28 (in the sense of power and strength), a form alluded to in the midrashic name derivation of the place in Hos. 12.4-5, where it is mentioned specifically as Beth-el together with two of its additional appellations, the house of strength and weeping. The transliterated form of the name Beth-on in the LXX, which reflects the original (3oti6(6v in Josh. 18.12; 1 Sam. 13.5, 14.23.29 The massoretic vocalization reflects an altered reading which indicates shame, based on the etymological legend attached to the name, a legend which implies the derision and scorn which was heaped on this place of idolatrous ritual. The use of this device, the midrashic name derivation, has singular influence, here both because it projects the idea that the fate of the location is implied within its essence, in this instance—nomen omen— and also because the menace derives from its strength, not only from the context but also from the sound, and through this it insinuates itself into the heart of the listeners even against their will and penetrates their memories despite themselves (Weiss 1992). The midrashic name derivation attached to the second city, Gilgal, is expressed in the fifth hemistich which is parallel to the third: 'for Gilgal shall surely go into exile' i (v. 5). If the mid28. Beth-on was situated apparently to the east of Beth-el and its place of ritual worship according to what emerges from a comparison between Josh. 7.2 with Gen. 12.8 (Zakovitch 1979: 418 n. 130). 29. The prophet Hosea continues this tradition of midrashic name derivations of place (see 4.15; 5.8; 10.5, 8). He also places Gilgal close to Beth-on (4.15; 10.5), when the words 'they rejoice fTT' and 'exiled n*73' allude to Gilgal and link it with this section of the text in Amos (thus Garsiel 1987: 129). Also 12.12.

6. Pivotal Patterns in Other Genres

231

rashic name derivation regarding the retribution to be brought upon Beth-el is based on the content, then, where Gilgal is concerned it is based on phonic repetition and a play on language (Rashi—'Its curse is in accordance with its name'). Yellin (1983: 298) perceives in this midrashic name derivation a type of alliteration in its two elements: Gil-gal meaning 'will surely go into exile' (a play on the Hebrew radical 'galo' meaning 'exile', as in the Hebrew ).30 In contrast to the two cities situated in the Northern Kingdom, the prophet mentions an additional city of ritual worship in the Kingdom of Judah, in the centre of the pivot pattern 'and do not pass to Beersheba'. Once again the prophet resorts to a play on words: the first syllable of the name of the city Beer and the verb 'you will pass which represents the letters in inverted order (see Zeidel 1978: 223 n. 89). In order to reach Beer-sheba, which was in the south of Judah, people had to cross the border of the Kingdom of Israel and therefore Amos says, 'Do not pass'. This religious centre is mentioned by Amos in 8.14 as well: 'As thy God, O Dan, lives; and, As the road to Beer-sheba lives; they shall fall and never rise up again'. Beer-sheba is located at the centre of the pivot pattern without any parallelism and the reasons for this are clear: while the prophet Amos proves that there is no validity in entering the sanctuaries situated in these cities because they are about to be destroyed, he neither desires nor is able to deliver the message of annihilation with regard to the Judaean city of Beer-sheba, which the children of Israel frequent, because they are not satisfied only with the sanctuaries of the north. Beer-sheba's situation as the final city on the list exempts the prophet31 from the necessity of either reacting to or rationalizing the nullification 30. The expression 'will be surely exiled occurs only in Amos's prophecy (see also 7.11, 17), according to Weiss (1992) apparently that the phrase was coined as a play on words on the name Gilgal 31. Cripps (1969) is of the opinion that the prophet has said enough on the topic and therefore does not express his verdict on Beer-sheba. Andersen-Freedman (1989) as well as Weiss (1992) hold the opinion that not mentioning Beer-sheba's punishment is not proof that it was exempt from punishment. Paul (1991) avers that Amos prophesied here against Israel and not against Judah, and therefore did not describe the retribution meted out to Beer-sheba. Weiss maintains that Amos had his reason for mentioning only these temples and not others such as Dan which is mentioned in another prophecy (8.14). The place or the time cause Amos to mention only these temples, in his opinion (Weiss 1992).

232

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

of entry to that city. Only as a result of our recognizing the structure of the pivot pattern, do we understand why the element containing the mention of Beer-sheba stands alone, and why there is no reason to remove this element from the text.32 Apparently, because in this pivot pattern the emphasis is placed on the initial and the final elements 'Seek me and you shall live' and 'Seek the Lord and live', with the middle section comprising the material concerning the sacred places of Beth-el, Gilgal and Beer-sheba, the prophet denounces the peregrinations of the people from sacred city to sacred city, where none of these possesses any purpose whatsoever (Zakovitch 1979: 536). Because of this the punishment (v. 6) is not included in the pivot pattern but is located within the section dealing with the cities whose names the prophet pronounces in the second half of the structure. Amos opposes the sanctuary in Beth-el (cf. 7.9-17) and the other places of worship, with all the force at his command, because he is in opposition to the observance of ritual commandments performed in a mechanical way and not in accordance with divine command. It is clear 32. Zakovitch (1979: 418-49). Cf. a similar structure in which there are place names as in this section of the text: A

Ashkelon shall see it and fear Gaza also shall see it and be very sorrowful C And Eqron shall see that her expectation has been confounded B' And the king shall perish from Gaza A' And Ashkelon shall not be inhabited (Zech. 9.5). See Weiss 1992. B

Attention should be given to the parallelism between Amos, discussed in this study, and Hosea; But do not seek Beth-el nor enter into Gilgal and do not pass to Beer-sheba (Amos 5.5).

and do not come to Gilggal nor go up to Beth-On

nor swear

. as the Lord lives (Hos. 4.15)

In the verse from Hosea there is a recognizable chiastic quotation (accepted as part of the biblical internal quotation) from Amos. In the LV of LXX the quotation from the Amos text is complete in Hos. 4.15. The clear relationship between the Amos text and that in Hosea proves that the mention of Beer-sheba in the Amos text is not an addendum. Beer-sheba is not actually mentioned by Hosea, but he alludes to it when he says Compare Amos 8.14 (cf. Zeidel 1978: 223). The fact that midrashic name derivation appears here without the name actually being mentioned should not surprise, because this is an accepted phenomenon in the Bible ('Selah'Num. 24.21; Jer. 49.16; Obad. 3). See Zakovitch 1979: 418 n. 132; Garsiel 1987: 85-107.

6. Pivotal Patterns in Other Genres

233

that his prophetic activity in the Northern Kingdom was directed against ritual worship in the sanctuaries of the state generally and against the sanctuary in Beth-el in particular (cf. 3.14) (Cassuto 1954: 63-67). Possibly, this is the reason why this episode, which emphasizes the prohibition on frequenting the places of ritual worship and the punishment threatened (at the periphery), is structured pivotally more so than any other of Amos's prophecies. 4. The Fate of the Wicked (Psalms 12.4-5) A

May the Lord cut off all flattering lips C The tongue that speaks proud things X who have said C1 With our tongue we will prevail B' our lips are our own A' who is lord over us

(v. 4)

B

(v. 5)

In the pivot pattern from this chapter of the book of Psalms, there is a discussion on the question of falsehood and lies, and on atheism and heresy spoken by evil men against the Lord (Gelender 1990: 39). The chapter is divided into four stanzas, each one containing two verses (excluding the heading) where the climax of the chapter is in v. 6,33 which commences the second section of the chapter (vv. 6-9), identical in its number of verses to the first section (vv. 2-5), with the response of the Lord.34 The verses of this structure conclude the first section of the psalm by presenting the petition of the worshipper for divine salvation as well as the utterances of the sinners and the malice of their hearts. This poetic pivot pattern is characterized by the brevity of its constituent elements and by its economy of language which indicate making the response of the worshipper, not only in its vocabulary, but also in its poetic rhythms, forming a parallel with the arrogance of the transgressors with their display of excessive confidence.35 33. It is only in this verse that we find the response of the Lord in direct speech ('Now shall I rise up sayeth the Lord') to the entreaty of the worshipper for God's salvation against the wicked. 34. Thus many commentators like Strauss (1954) and Buttenweiser (1969). 35. Attention should be given to the common meter of the words of the psalmist and the wicked people: 2.2.3.

234

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

The structure opens with the poet's prayer and his request to the Lord, 'May the Lord cut off (all flattering lips), with the verb in the shortened form of the imperfect tense, expressing a request, in which the psalmist seems to express a lack of confidence. The third person singular is used here in contrast to the grammatical forms in 'They speak every one with his fellow' (3) (because the structure under discussion is linked directly with vv. 3-4), to indicate that the sin of the wicked in speaking falsehood against their fellow-man is a transgression before the Lord. '[M]ay he cut off may be explained literally, as amputating36 or it might refer to the fact that the Lord will bring about the death of those with flattering lips, an example of synecdoche, a part for the whole. In direct contrast to the psalmist's appeal to the Lord which occurs at the beginning of this pericope, we find the words of the wicked at its conclusion, the words of those with flattering lips. They do not mention the name of the Lord in what they say, but heap honour on themselves in singularly arrogant language, asking the rhetorical question, replete with irony, 'Who is lord over us?' and realizing fully that the negative response (nobody) is inherent in the question itself. The character of these flatterers is clearly defined. There is no spark of the divine in their heart (cf. Strauss 1954: 10; Weiss 1962: 123), and therefore their utterances are devoid of any vestige of godliness, as we find in a number of other chapters in the book of Psalms (e.g. 46.7). This is emphasized by the remainder of the verses in the chapter (with the exception of vv. 3 and 5 which contain the words of the wicked), where we find the name of the Lord repeated on the lips of the psalmist. From this can be inferred that the words of the sinners, those of flattering lips, represent a world that is unblest with divine presence (Weiss 1987:311). It is with arrogance and pride that they ask, 'Who is lord over us [?]' which is in contrast to 'the Lord' as uttered by the psalmist. The sinners have no desire to acknowledge the authority of the Lord, possibly to the extent of denying his very existence (cf. Ps. 14.1, 73.11). In contradistinction to the lordship of God they pronounce that their authority is the equivalent of that of the divine. It would seem that they hint, too, at the sanctity of their own reign. 36. The cutting off of the tongue and the lips was the accepted punishment in Mesopotamia for lying and deception. From here it is clear that the slaying of people is being discussed.

6. Pivotal Patterns in Other Genres

235

The parallelism between 'the Lord' and the 'lord' occurs in many sections of the scriptural text, such as: Exod. 23.17, 34.23; Isa. 1.24, 3.1; Ps. 114.7; etc. The God of Israel is known as the Lord (Deut. 10.17; Ps. 136.3; Neh. 8.10). This hauteur gives rise to rebellion (as occurs in the narrative concerning the generation of the Tower of Babel [Gen. 11.1-9]). There too we encounter the words 'language and 'speech because these perpetrators of evil contend that with the power of speech, of their language and of their verbal utterances, they will achieve complete dominion and will do exactly in accordance with their own will, and there will be none who will obliterate their handiwork (cf. Ps. 73.8-9). This arrogance is characteristic of evil men and their linguistic style, captured in many of the chapters of Psalms (e.g. 10.6, 14.1, 73.11), and it frequently occurs as a rhetorical question (cf. 73.11). The psalmist asks that all flattering lips be cut off, and the reference is to those who flatter, speak hypocritically and insincerely, those who are smooth of tongue and black of heart (cf: 'from the smoothness of the tongue of an alien' [Prov. 6.24]), to those of flattering lips and tongue, like (Ps. 31.19): 'Let the lying lips be put to silence; which speak arrogant words proudly, and contemptuously, against the righteous.' In contrast to the term 'the flattering lips' as used by the psalmist, we find the arrogant term 'our lips are our own' employed by the wicked in parallel to it. What they are saying in effect is: we have lips and we shall speak, and they therefore say, 'Who is lord over us[?]' Following on the psalmist's request in the first section of the structure, we find the request 'may (he) cut off, referring to 'the tongue31 that speaks proud things', which is similar to the language used in the book of Daniel: 'and a mouth speaking great things' (Dan. 7.8). The intention is to emphasize the haughty and contemptuous language aimed at both man and God. In like terms: Talk no more so very proudly ...' (1 Sam. 2.3 as well as Ps. 31.19). What emerges from this is that the transgression of lying and speaking falsehood by man against his fellow-man gives rise to the sin of haughtiness and contempt towards the poor as well as the sin of blasphemy and the vilification of heaven.

37. There are those who add '[and every] tongue', based on 'All lips'. But this is unnecessary.

236

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

'The tongue that speaks proud things'. This contemptuous expression of evil men is couched in direct speech in the parallel element: 'with our tongue we will prevail'. LXX if translated back into Hebrew substitutes the preposition beth for the preposition lamed or omits the preposition altogether. Possibly this is because of the use of the hiphil conjugation but with the qal meaning, which is frequently encountered in Scripture: 'to become rich' and 'he grasped' (Haiot 1902); or possibly 'we will achieve dominion with our tongue'; or a verb formed from a noun, as in 'we shall prevail from the noun hero like the verb 'we shall commemorate from the noun 'remembrance (Ps. 20.8) (Dahood 1966). They maintain that the more their tongue speaks flattery and guile, the more their strength will increase and multiply. Language and speech (the quintessentially human attributes) are treated as one for the purposes of the headings for the sections in this chapter, which indicates the negative influence that a particular type of lips (flattering) and tongue exerts on human speech.38 At the centre of the structure we find a formulaic opening for the utterances of evil people 'who have said', (which does not constitute the climax of the pattern from the ideastic point of view), but which separates the psalmist's petition from the pronouncements of the evil doers. It is as if the psalmist is hearing how the sinners hold forth with supreme self-confidence about their success in controlling society: emphasis is given to this by both the internal and external rhyming provided by the use of the first person plural pronominal suffix attached to the words 'our tongue', 'our lips', 'our own', 'to us' They do not content themselves with speech alone, but translate it into the language of action: we shall prevail. The psalmist presents this in the direct speech of the perpetrators of wickedness in order to increase the impression created by what they say and to bestow a dramatic vitality on their pronouncements, and by so doing to persuade the Lord to intercede on behalf of the petitioner (Kraus 1988). In both biblical poetry and biblical prose, the author exercises a preference for presenting the words of the evil doers in direct speech. He creates thereby an antithetical parallelism to his own prayer, by beseeching the Lord to proffer assistance in repaying them measure for 38. Buber 1964: 144. A combination of 'lip and tongue' occurs in Isa. 28.11; Ezra 3.5-6.

6. Pivotal Patterns in Other Genres

237

measure for their evil conduct (The Lord intervenes. In contradistinction to 'who have said'—'and the Lord said' [v. 6]. But his utterances are outside the boundaries of the pivot pattern). Therefore only these verses are presented within the pivot pattern, and this emphasizes their punishment with greater force, in parallel to their transgression: they sinned through their tongue and through their tongue they will be punished. 5. The Chronicler's Preface to the Listing of the Sons of Reuben (1 Chronicles 5.1-3) A

Now the sons of Reuben, the first-born of Israel for he was the firstborn: B but since he defiled his father's bed his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph, the son of Israel: but not as to have the birthright attributed to him by genealogy X For Judah prevailed over his brothers, and of him came the chief ruler B' though the birthright was Joseph's A' The sons of Reuben, the first-born of Israel were

(v. 1)

(v. 2) (v. 3)

This pivot pattern is comprised of the introductory remarks to a catalogue of the relationships of the sons of Reuben, most of which constitutes a parenthetical clause,39 in which the Chronicler elucidates the relationship among Jacob's three sons: Reuben, Joseph and Judah. In the first verse the relationship between Reuben and Joseph is explained and in the second that between Joseph and Judah. The pivot pattern is created within these verses as a result of their integration into the context by a recurring introduction: 'according to the punctuation it reiterates "the sons of Reuben", once again'.40 This introduction, known in the research literature as 'linking iteration', is a specific literary form in which the author returns, at the end of the pericope, to the principal concern of the issue. The episode may be of two types: (a) a digression from the main topic made by the author himself; (b) an insertion of foreign material from another source. The nature of the linking iteration is that the author repeats, either graphically or orally, the sentence or the idea that occurred immediately before the parenthetical phrase. This 39. A similar parenthetical clause occurs in the list in 1 Chron. 27.23-24. Cf. De Vries 1989: 55-56. 40. Radak. Cf. Kuhl (1952) who calls this method Wiederaufnahme. See Kaufmann 1963b: 76-77; Seligman 1992a: 53-54; Rofe 1994: 7 n. 12 and literature.

238

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

is the case with the Joseph narrative. After Genesis 38, which deals with Judah and Tamar, it would seem that an editor quotes the verse (with amendments) of ch. 37 after the gloss in order to retie the narrative thread, which has been broken by this seemingly unconnected episode (cf. Gen. 37.36, 39.1). In 1 Chron. 5.1-3 the author repeats th sentence, after he has introduced a parenthetical clause dealing with the reason of the loss of the birthright by the tribe of Reuben.41 The introduction to the structure is a heading to the list of the relationships of Reuben's sons: now the sons of Reuben the first-born of Israel*2 This version, which reflects an ancient tradition, is based on Gen. 46.9 and Num. 26.5-7 in which Reuben appears as the first-born of Israel. This is clear everywhere in Scripture. Whether it is stated categorically or whether it emerges from a list of Jacob's sons, his name always appears first.43 The first-born appears as the first in the genealogical lists of different kinds (cf. 1 Chron. 2.1, 2.13). But in the genealogical sections of Chronicles the author has placed the genealogical list of the tribe of Judah (and its sons) who prevailed over his brothers (chs. 2.3-4.23) prior to those of the tribe of Reuben and the genealogical list of the tribe of Simeon (4.24-43), who dwelt in southern Judaea. Whichever is the case, it is clear why the text presents explanatory notes, initially, as to why Reuben placed the lineage of his younger brothers, the sons of Leah, before himself. He expressed this in the version which opens the parenthetical clause: for he was the firstborn. This sentence is situated immediately after establishing the fact that 'Reuben (is) the first-born of Israel', and before the sentence in which the reason for the deprivation of the privileges of the first-born is stated ('but since he defiled'). It would therefore seem that the appearance of the adverbial clause of reason here is explained, somewhat apologetically, by the statement, that no reader should be confused by the association of the title first-born with the inferior tribe of Reuben. The explanatory sentence indicates that he is indeed the first-born despite

41. There is no reason to think that foreign material from another source has been inserted here. Cf. Seeligmann 1992: 54, 60. 42. Read here Israel and not Jacob because the patriarch of the tribes is being discussed. Cf. Cassuto 1990: 119; Williamson 1982: 72. 43. Gen. 35.23, 46.8, 49.2; Exod. 6.14; Num. 1.20, 26.5 and the first of Moses' blessings (Deut. 33.5).

6. Pivotal Patterns in Other Genres

239

the fact that he has been deprived of the privileges which accompany that status (Brin 1971:210). In the final hemistich of the pattern we once again find the words 'The sons of Reuben the first-born of Israel' (v. 3), which serve to introduce the list of his sons and this in the form of a linking iterative introduction (cf. Seeligman 1992: 54; Japhet 1977: 274) so that the external framework of the structure comprises the words Reuben the first-born of Israel, while the list of the sons is presented in 1 Chron. 5.3b, which is outside of the framework of the pattern. In the second element we find the reason for divesting Reuben of the birthright: but since he defiled his father's bed, which alludes to Gen. 35.22 but mainly to Gen. 49.4 ('Unstable as water thou shalt not excel; because thou wentest up to thy father's bed, then thou didst defile if). Also the author prefers the more obscure version which does not indicate exactly how and against whom Reuben sinned (Zakovitch-Shinan 1984: 14). This act perpetrated against Bilha cost him 'the double portion' due to him in accordance with the law of the first-born's inheritance (Deut. 21.17), and therefore: his birthright44was given to the sons of Joseph,45 the son of Israel Possibly the Chronicler recalls Gen. 48.5: 'And now thy two sons who were born to thee ... are mine Ephraim and Manasseh as Reuben and Simeon shall they be mine' and 'like Reuben and Simeon' is interpreted as instead of Reuben and Simeon. This interpretation does not explain what is written in Genesis 48, and even in Gen. 49.4 it is not stated that the birthright was actually taken from Reuben.46 But one cannot ignore the fact that Joseph's two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, enjoyed the double inheritance in accordance with the law of the firstborn 'a double portion of all that he has' (Deut. 21.17). Transmission of the birthright is not unknown in Scripture (Isaac and Ishmael, Jacob and 44. The words 'his blessing' as well as 'blessing occur in place of 'birthright in LXX. This amendment is unacceptable in the opinion of most of the researchers, in that by amending these words LXX avoids the contradiction between 'and the birthright was given to Joseph' 'but not so as to have the birthright attributed to him'. Cf. Zakovitch-Shinan 1984: 56. And the following change also appears: 'he gave the birthright to his son'. This alteration is also superfluous in that LXX desires to create harmoniousness with v. 2: 'and the birthright was Joseph's'. 45. Joseph was the first-born of his mother, the son of the beloved wife (cf. Deut. 21.15-17). 46. Cf. Japhet 1977: 274 n. 198, as well as Williamson 1982: 90.

240

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Esau, Ephraim and Manasseh). Nor is it unknown in the ancient East.47 The transfer of the birthright was only performed de facto and did not occasion changes in the lists of heirs, and therefore Joseph does not appear as the first-born in these lists, but not as to have the birthright** attributed49—It would appear that this verse applies to Reuben and not to Joseph,50 that is to say that the transmission of rights does not divest Reuben of his entitlement to appear first in the genealogical lists. He continues to be first in all that concerns the birthright and the genealogical record. And hence, in the parallel hemistich which is the fourth in the pattern: though the birthright was Joseph's the birthright cannot be removed from him (Reuben) in the genealogy (Tank. B., Toldot 23). This was indicated after the description of Judah's elevation (see below), and alludes, as already mentioned, to the double portion of inheritance (Deut. 21.17). The author explains how Reuben preserves his place in the genealogical hierarchy despite having lost the privileges of the birthright. Even more so: the Chronicler views the sections of the text concerned with Reuben within the broad framework of the entire book of Genesis (including 35.21-26), and accordingly he gives expression to the central position which Joseph occupies in the final section of the book. In his opinion Reuben is divested of the birthright to the advantage of Joseph lord of all Egypt (Zakovitch-Shiman 1984: 72). In the light of what is written in this section of the text, it is reasonable to assume that Joseph's offspring, the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, are accepted by the Chronicler as the first-born of Israel, and this fact serves as a starting point to the understanding of his attitude to them (Japhet 1977: 274). Possibly the Chronicler repeats the words though the birthright was Joseph's in order to emphasize that the birthright was not bestowed on Judah, and this is the difference 47. See Mendelsohn 1959. The lawgiver in Deut. 21.15-17 opposes this phenomenon. 48. An infinitive with the addition of a preposition without a verb prior to it, occurs in ,1 Chron. 15.2: 'Then David said, none ought to carry the Ark of God ' cf. Gesenius 1960: par. 114k. 49. The birthright was not given to Joseph so that he would be called first-born, because Reuben would be forever known as 'the first-born of Israel', but for the taking of two portions as first-born (Rashbam, his commentary on b. B. Bat. 123a). 50. Thus the Aramaic translation. And the opinion of Brin (1971: 211-12) is different from this.

6. Pivotal Patterns in Other Genres

241

between them (Brin 1971: 216-17). The Chronicler intends to describe the conflict between Joseph and Judah with regard to the hegemony of the tribes of Israel and with regard to the real historical background of Reuben's birthright. The issue is clear because the author does not satisfy himself with simply indicating Joseph's entitlement to the birthright, but links it to the question of the tribe of Judah (in the central element) 'but not as to have the birthright attributed to him by genealogy, For Judah prevailed51 over his brothers, and of him came the chief ruler' ,52 As a result of the fact that Reuben was a tribe that experienced a decline in greatness (cf. Deut. 33.6), it is clear that the implications of the hegemony described here are perfectly comprehensible. But the description of the transferal of that hegemony from Reuben is not presented clearly, and this is probably because of the dynastic struggle waged by Joseph and Judah regarding the birthright of the tribes of Israel. This description is unique, in that it is situated in the book of Chronicles, which is known to be a source of enthusiastic support for the Southern Kingdom. According to this account, Joseph prevailed over Judah at an early stage in the annals of Israel (see the duplication of: 'the birthright was given to the sons of Joseph' and 'though the birthright was Joseph's').53 Attention should be given to the fact that despite Judah's prevailing over his brother, he is not titled 'first-born'.54 In place of this the author adopts a more realistic descriptive terminology 'For Judah prevailed 51. LXX reads 'warrior'. The verb recalls Isaac's words to Esau about Jacob: 'Behold I have made him, thy lord' (Gen. 27.27). 52. The lamedh serves to emphasize and the meaning is the leader. Cf. Japhet 1977: 274 n. 196. 53. Cf. Brin 1971: 213. This relating to the conflict between Joseph and Judah occurs also in Ps. 78.67-68. and he rejected the tabernacle of Joseph but chose the tribe of Judah

and chose not the tribe of Ephraim the Mount Zion which he loved

The psalmist here emphasizes the ascendency of the tribe of Judah over Joseph with greater intensity. Possibly this section of the text and sections of the text from the book of Genesis were available to the author of the book of Chronicles and he was influenced by them when he wrote about the seniority of the tribe of Judah (cf. Zalevski 1981: 287). A similar relationship to this issue, within different texts, therefore occurs. 54. Attention should be given to the sixfold repetition of the words 'first-born' and 'birthright' in this section, but not once in connection with Judah.

242

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

over his brothers and of him came the chief ruler'. What follows in the text, 'though the birthright was Joseph's', reinforces my interpretation of these appellations (cf. Brin 1971: 216-17) and their position in the hierarchy of the pivotal parallelisms, where at the climax of the pattern with its description of Judah an appellation other than 'first-born' ('chief ruler') is employed. This pivot pattern deals with the web of relationships which existed among the tribes of Reuben, Joseph and Judah and the actual transmission of the hegemony from tribe to tribe. The description of the duplication which occurs in this section is not exclusively for the purpose of expressing the idea that Joseph, on the one hand and Judah on the other are the principal forces operative in the split kingdoms of the people of Israel which had previously been united (Brin 1971: 217), and situated at the periphery of the structure is Reuben, recipient of the birthright and subsequently deprived of it because of his desecration of his father's bedchamber,55 whose tribe was small and situated beyond the frontiers of the land on the east bank of the Jordan. In the two parallel hemistichoi, the second and the fourth, the name of Joseph, to whom the birthright was given, is mentioned. At the centre of the structure we find the main idea, that Judah is the mightiest and the principal tribe in Israel because he 'prevailed over his brothers'. It can be inferred from this that the issue of the changing hands of the reins of government and the need to justify the choice of the house of David was a matter of considerable moment. It engaged scriptural literature not only contemporaneously with the events themselves, or at a time close to their taking place, where it found expression in stories, in poetry and in the tendency to glorify the house of David to emphasize the significance and singular importance of the tribe of Judah even when compared to the house of Joseph, which enjoyed a central place in the tribal hierarchy in Israelite tradition, but also in the period of the Second Temple as it is expressed in this section of the text (cf. Mazar 1974: 143; Amit 1992a: 116). I discover once again that the pivot pattern is not an ornamental adornment but has great significance in conveying the message contained even in a list, in which the literary pattern under discussion is not

55. An aetiological story? Yeivin is of the opinion that it is (1976: 289).

6. Pivotal Patterns in Other Genres

243

expected. The literary presentation of the items in the pattern is connected to their content and denotes their climax: at the centre of the pattern I find the tribe of Judah against the background of the offspring of Joseph and those of Reuben. 6. Summary I have analysed in this appendix four structures which constitute examples of law, prophecy, psalmic literature and the list, and have discovered that by way of my research of pivot patterns in the Former Prophets that the pivot structure is appropriate to these genres as well. I have found that in these structures, too, the central idea appears in the majority of instances at the climax of the pattern for the sake of emphasis. These examples testify to the fact that the literary device under discussion occurs in the majority of the books of Scripture, in the variety of literary genres contained in them (including those which at first glance would not be expected to contain literary devices of this nature, like law and lists, although there has been considerable research done on literary patterns in these genres), as a literary medium that the authors and editors of Scripture were enamoured of. It would seem therefore that these examples serve to prove that research into this particular device, the pivot pattern, provides ample opportunities for the scholar.

Chapter 7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

1. The Scope of the Patterns The structures are divided according to their subject matter in the following way: Chapter 2 3 4 5

Subjects

Number of patterns

Decree and implementation Action and outcome The language of reprimand Patterns of request, prayer and proposal

8 9 3 5 Total 25

The largest number of structures (9) is devoted to action and outcome expressed through the voice of the narrator. This notwithstanding, in the majority of the patterns (16 in number) the voice is that of the interlocutor. From this I have inferred that the scriptural narrator preferred to structure the majority of pivot patterns in which pronouncements are made directly by the speaker or speakers.1 The majority of the pivot patterns are brief. Their scope is expressed in the table below: Number of structures

1.

Number of verses

A

5 6 4 Total 15

1 2 3 Range 1-3

B

3 1 3 Total 7

4 5 6 Range 4-6

See section 4, The identity of the speaker in the patterns', in this chapter.

7. Summary and Conclusions Number of structures

C

1 1 1 Total 3 Range 7-12

245

Number of verses 7 8 12 Range 7-12

Apparently the pericope is the most significant unit in biblical prose, in the 'architecture of the narrative' (cf. Fokkelman 1981: 9), and it consists of a limited number of verses. The number of elements is also of significance in identifying this type of literary unit. Number of patterns 11 5 4 4 1

Number of elements 5 7 3 9 17

It becomes evident that almost half of the patterns have 5 elements, a fifth of them have 7 elements,2 and only one (1 Kgs 1.24-35) the longest of all, has 17 elements. It can be concluded from this that the majority of patterns are characterized by the economy of their scope, thus allowing the narrator to organize the elements of the pattern with great precision. Extended patterns overburden the memory with a great amount of detail (cf. Zevit 1990: 400) but the limited framework of the pericope and the simple sentence distinguishes the format of this pattern. There are a number of complex problems inherent in the extended framework, more especially so because the pattern appears interwoven within other formats (Polak 1994: 215). 2. The Limits of the Patterns In modern biblical research it is customary to delineate the limits of the pericope by means of iterative expressions, style and structure, elements repeated according to a fixed rule (cf. Gelender 1983: 28), the conclusion of the pericope, characterized by tautology, a change in order, for example, the interchanging of a verb and a noun, etc. (cf. 2. It is possible that this represents a residual chiastic septet that fulfils the requirements of the three-four pattern. Cf. Zakovitch 1979: 27.

246

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Mirsky 1978: 32, 33, 36, 49, etc.). Awareness of the existence of the pattern assists in the location of the introduction and the conclusion of the literary unit (particularly in places where changes have given rise to dispute by researchers) and in comprehending its sense or meaning (cf. Zakovitch 1979: 31). Connecting those aspects which repeat themselves with obvious frequency indicates the existence of a literary pattern. When this frequency is altered or when a specific rule dictating structure is non-existent it is possible to recognize the conclusion of the literary pattern or at least the commencement of another (Gelender 1983: 29). The prescribed limitation of the pattern is clearer when dialogue is present, in which the tension existing in the conflicting interests of the two parties reaches its climax, that is to say when the one party 'throws down the gauntlet' and issues a challenge to the other, and the reader awaits the outcome. It can be assumed that when this response does not occur, and is not even hinted at, then the literary unit has been cut short (see, e.g., 2 Sam. 3.24-25; 6.20-22) (Gelender 1983: 25). Discerning a literary pattern (in the majority of pericopes), as being structured in accordance with the pivot pattern, makes a significant contribution to the determining of its boundaries and the identification of the climactic points within it, even though these may not always be similar. a. The Boundaries of the Pattern as Boundaries of a Literary Unit In this way, therefore, the pivot pattern, whose parallel elements are spread around the pivot in a reversed order, apparently confirms the scope of the pericope. Indeed, the structure of the pivot pattern appears frequently as a pericope. Outstanding examples of this are to be found in Judg. 9.56-57, in the summary written by the author regarding Abimelech's reign as well as Joab's rebuke of David (2 Sam. 3.24-25) which appear in the pattern as a pericope ('and he came ... and he went out...'), and so on. But occasionally the structure does not testify to the presence of the pericope, to indicate to the reader that the pattern appears as a part of a literary unit. These sections of the text are limited in accordance with the rules of the pattern into a section of the literary unit. It is possible to assume that the original author of whichever narrative it is was able to construct the beginning of his story (or parts therefore) on the basis of a well-known and conventional form such as the pivot pattern, without in

7. Summary and Conclusions

247

any way being obliged to continue and adhere to the same fundamentals in the remainder of the narrative. Whichever way, it cannot be said that the location at which any given unit ceases to behave in accordance with the rules known to the reader, is the place in which it ceases to be one literary unit—and becomes something else (Alter 1988: 61-67). b. Patterns in which a Part of the Speaker's Words Occur within the Structure In contrast to those structures in which the spokesman's speech in its entirety occurs within the pattern (as in the Lord's words to Samuel [1 Sam. 8.7-9]), there are structures in which the speaker's words appear only in part within the structure (and the balance of the utterances occur outside of the boundaries of the pattern): (bl) (b2)

(b3)

Gideon's words to his men appear in Judg. 7.17-18. But only v. 17 is structured pivotally. The dialogue between Joab and the messenger occurs in 2 Sam. 18.10-14, but only part of the conversation is structured as a pivot pattern (10-1 la). Even more so Joab's words that do occur within the pattern are cut off. Here obviously it is not possible to delineate the limits of the pericope in accordance with the boundaries of the structure. Na'aman's words to Elisha as well (2 Kgs 5.15) are lopped off (in the middle of the verse), possibly, again, to differentiate between the words concerning the greatness of the Lord and those which constitute a part of the action: his request from Elisha to accept a blessing from him.

I can conclude therefore that there is not always a linkage between the pattern and the defined literary unit. Leastwise, the pattern does not necessarily assist in defining it. c. The Pattern Constitutes Only a Part of the Literary Unit (cl)

(c2)

Philistine activity subsequent to their victory over the children of Israel is described in 1 Sam. 31.8-10. But only vv. 9-10 are included in the pivot pattern. David's reaction to his son's falling ill and subsequent death is described in 2 Sam. 12.16-23. Yet only vv. 16-20 occur within the pivot pattern. His servants' astonishment and David's response stand outside of the pattern.

248

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

(c3)

Those verses which describe the plundering of the holy vessels (Judg. 18.16 -17) do not constitute a pericope, and are a part of a much broader picture depicting the evil acts performed by the children of Dan in the house of Micah (11-21). (d) A number of patterns, which do not conform at all to the division accepted by researchers, are recognized by way of a contingency ending (cf. Zakovitch 1982b: 74), that is, the final verse in the unit is also the first to begin the next one. (dl) In the Lord's decree to Elijah (1 Kgs 17.2-7) there are those who perceive v. 7 as a contingency ending, in that, while it is a clear conclusion to the pericope it also constitutes the opening of the next unit which deals with Elijah's arrival at the house of the widow in Zarapath. (d2) The description of Na'aman's recovery from leprosy (2 Kgs 5.8-15) concludes with v. 15 which delineates the structure and attests to its existence. But this verse also commences a new pericope, in which Na'aman's gratitude to Elisha is expressed (15-19). It is not surprising that this expression of thanks is itself divided into two units. The first section is interwoven into the pivot pattern, and his suggestion at the conclusion of his speech, 'now therefore, I pray thee, take a blessing of thy servant', is linked to the subsequent pericope. The examples cited above support the claim that the model does not attest to the boundaries of the literary unit. There are times when the model exceeds the limits of the literary unit (1 Kgs 1.24-25), but on many occasions it encompasses only a part of it. 3. The Subject Matter of the Patterns On examination of the subjects included in the pivot patterns found in the Former Prophets, it emerges that half of the structures describe killing (death), or deal with matters concerning preparation for killing or issues that follow in its wake. In three of the structures actual killing (death) is dealt with: 'And the dead of the Philistines felV (1 Sam. 17.52); 'and they cut off his head' (1 Sam. 31.9); 'And the child died* (2 Sam. 12.18). In seven of the structures issues are dealt with that allude to death either directly (Gideon's address to his men [Judg. 7.17]; Joab's reprimand of David [2 Sam 3.24-25]; Joab's reproach to the man ['and why didst thou not

7. Summary and Conclusions

249

smite him'—2 Sam. 18.11]; Solomon's instruction to Benaiah ['and strike him down'—1 Kgs 2.31]) or indirectly (Hushai's counsel to Absalom ['there shall not—be left so much as one'—2 Sam. 17.7-14]: David's oath that Solomon will reign [1 Kgs 1.24-35]; the Lord's response to the man of God ['thy carcass shall not come to the tomb of thy fathers'—1 Kgs 13.22]). In three of the structures there is a discussion on issues subsequent to, and in the wake of, killing: the author's response, in a synopsis of the reign of Abimelek ('which he did to his father in slaying his seventy brothers'—Judg. 9.56-57), in the people's acknowledgment of David's deeds (that he did not slay Abner—2 Sam. 3.36) and in Jonadab's mollifying of David after the death of Amnon ('for Amnon only is dead"— 2 Sam. 13.33). It would seem that murder is a dramatic event, which encourages the use of an extraordinary literary device, which emphasizes the uniqueness of the deed as well as stressing incidents, which are based on actions which influence fate on the personal, national and international level. For this the biblical narrator employs a model which we know as the pivot pattern, and in five of these instances the slaying is mentioned at the centre of the pattern.3 It is certainly possible to investigate the relationship between those stories in the Former Prophets, in which acts of violence are described, and those in which there is none. Examination reveals that 69 chapters out of 147 in the Former Prophets have some reference to incidents of violence. But this number is misleading and it is necessary to be precise and indicate that in the majority of these chapters violence is described only in isolated verses, and the central issue in the chapter is something entirely different. An example of this is 1 Samuel 6 which deals with the peregrinations of the Ark and only in one verse (20) is there mention of the plague which afflicted the people of Beth-shemesh. Many more examples of this phenomenon exist. I may infer from this that violence constitutes the main subject matter in only a small proportion of the chapters in the Former Prophets and if the pivot pattern, with its restricted scope, containing isolated verses, is 3. Judg. 9.56: 'which he did to his father in slaying his seventy brothers'; 1 Sam. 17.52: "and the dead of the Philistines fell by the way to Sha'arayim'; 2 Sam. 12.18: 'how then shall we tell him that the child is dead'; 1 Kgs 2.32: "and he slew them with the sword, my father David not knowing of it'; 2 Kgs 19.17: 'Of a truth, Lord, the Kings of Assyria have destroyed the nations and their lands'.

250

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

selected for the description of acts of murder and violence (15 structures out of 25), then there is sound reason for this, as has already been indicated. In eight of the structures there occur matters which are addressed to the prophet. In certain instances the structure contains these issues only (1 Sam. 3.17; 8.7-9; 1 Kgs 13.22; 2 Kgs 5.18) and in other instances they constitute only a section of the pivot structure (1 Kgs 1.24-35; 13.8-9, 16-17; 17.2-7; 2 Kgs 5.8-15). Here, too, the number of structures which deal with matters addressed to the prophet is comparatively large (almost a third of the total number), comparatively larger than the scope of the chapters in the books of the Former Prophets whose content is similar. Possibly the intention is to highlight the respected role that the prophet plays as an intercessionary between the Lord and his people: he is commanded to bring the word of the nation to the Lord and his word to the nation, and to implement divine instructions. 4. The Identity of the Speaker in the Patterns The biblical narrator creates a narrative event (Alter's terminology, 1988: 78) by the act of reporting it. In many more instances he presents the words of the characters in the story. Therefore the typical biblical story comprises action and speech. Poetic speech fulfils a secondary role to direct speech used by the characters in many of the sections, and even when indirect speech is used it is usually the words of the characters reported by the narrator and not conveyed by the speaker. The narrator prefers to use the vibrant utterances of the characters as he conveys what they say and not to present them in summary form (Gelender 1983: 34). As a result of this the third person narration of the story often provides a bridge between far larger sections in direct speech (Alter 1988: 79). The pivot pattern in the Former Prophets is built on by way of narrative conveyed by the biblical narrator. I find structures where we hear the voice of the narrator alone in indirect speech, and structures in which direct speech by one of the characters is presented (or by a number of characters as a 'collective' hero). There are instances where the narrative event is created from the utterances of character and author combined. That is to say: reported and direct speech together create the structure before us. In nine of the patterns I have been able to identify only the narrator's voice, meaning that he alone has created the event by reporting on it. In

7. Summary and Conclusions

251

this type of structure the narrator chooses to summarize the incident, to anticipate it or to relate it in the third person and not to permit one of the characters to recount it. Therefore it is clear that not every issue is suitable for first person narration by one of the characters, and direct intervention is required by the narrator. In a number of the structures the narrator chooses to report on an incident preceded by a conversation (or a prior incident) where the voice of one of the characters is heard in conversation succeeding it as well. This is so in the recounting of the incident involving the plunder of the holy artifacts (Judg. 18.16-17), as well as 1 Sam. 23.14-15, 2 Sam. 3.36 and 2 Kgs 15.18—21. In certain of the structures the narrator summarizes an event from his point of view without reference to what the characters have said, and in this way he expresses his own opinion of the incident. This is how the narrator sums up the reign of Abimelek (Judg. 9.5657) and Israel's wars with the Philistines (1 Sam. 17.51-54, 31.9-10). I have found also that the narrator starts with a summary of the nature of Solomon's reign and his dominion over the nations (1 Kgs 4.20-5.5). It is abundantly clear that this summary emanates from the narrator and not from any of the characters. In six of the structures I find that the narrator integrates either the character's or the characters' speech together with his own. Sometimes alternating one with the other and at others placing the reported speech either before or after that of the characters. This is the case, for example, with those structures containing a decree and its implementation: in half of the structure there is a decree by the Lord to Elijah, and in the latter half the implementation as described by the author in language similar to that of the decree (1 Kgs 17.2-7). This occurs in 1 Kgs 2.31-34 as well: only in the final line is the implementation of the decree described by the author whereas the remainder of the structure is occupied by the decree itself in the direct speech of King Solomon. The integration of the report by the author and the actual words used by the characters occurs in Elisha's command to Na'aman (2 Kgs 5.815). A similar type of integration, but with somewhat different treatment occurs in two of the patterns: in one of them the utterances of the characters take precedence over all else in the structure and the narrator's words are brief (1 Kgs 1.24-35), whereas in the second the main

252

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

feature of the structure is the reportage of the narrator and the dialogue is secondary (2 Sam. 12.6-20). It is interesting to note that in the structures where there is integration combining narration and direct speech the direct speech plays the dominant role whereas the reported speech is of secondary importance. This is inferred from the fact that in the majority of the structures (6, and in the structures generally—15) direct speech by one of the characters is situated at the climax of the structure. It is only in 1 of the patterns that the reported speech of the narrator occurs at the climax of the pattern: in 1 Kgs 17.5. This phenomenon is appropriate to the literary tone of the Bible in general: where a narrative event in Scripture is considered significant, the author conveys it in the form of a dialogue, so the means by which reported speech transfers to dialogue is an elided yardstick for the measurement of what is considered to be significant, and what sub-ordinate or secondary to the main action (Alter 1988: 205). Approximately half of the structures (ten in number) are built on direct speech by one (or more) of the characters. It is not surprising that this method dominates: a dialogue is more effective than a harangue by the narrator. Direct speech is the simplest manner of conveying dialogue (Licht 1978: 39). The major penetration into the essence of the heroes' beings is achieved by quotation (Bar-Efrat 1979: 57). Extensive use of dialogue enhances the illusion of the presence of the characters and intensifies the personal tone of the text, and this occurs in those instances where the narrative is structured in the form of a pivot pattern (cf. Zakovitch 1979: 93-100). More so, direct speech is appropriate to setting the scene which is delineated by the dimension of time. It is linked to the relationship between the time of the narration and the instant at which the event took place. The time which it takes to report a conversation which has taken place in direct speech is similar, more or less, to the time taken by the conversation itself. To the auditor it seems as if he is a witness to the dialogue, something which adds emphasis to what is said. The mise-en-scene is essential to the impact of the narrative, and direct speech constitutes the very essence of scene setting. In eight of the structures the principal character is the narrator (Gideon, Eli, David, David, Joab, David, Na'aman, Hezekiah), and in the remainder it is a secondary character (Jonadab, Hushai, the messenger, David's servants). I conclude from this that the narrator, in his

7. Summary and Conclusions

253

desire to stress the importance of the interlocutor's words, does not distinguish between the main and the subsidiary characters. The pivot pattern gives equal stress to highlighting the words spoken by all the characters. In two of them I find isolated conjunctions, indicating a change of interlocutor in the dialogue, as in the dialogue between Michal and David, 'And David said unto Michal' (2 Sam. 6.21), and in the counsel of Hushai: 'And Hushai said unto Absalom', 'And Absalom said unto the men of Israel' (2 Sam. 17.7-14). In the remainder of the patterns (ten) I find only direct speech by a character (and in one instance characters [a collective character]: the servants of David to their king [1 Kgs 1.2]); Gideon to his men (Judg. 7.17); Eli to Samuel (1 Sam. 3.17); and others. Despite what has been said in this section the number of models describing action and outcome, in which I find the words of the narrator mainly, is greater than the number of models dealing with a different topic, in which direct speech predominates. 5. The Relation between the Pivot of the Pattern and its Conceptual-Literary Climax The essence of the pivot pattern and its main objective is to place the principal idea contained within it at the climax of the pattern, at its centre. The reader, trained in the techniques of this particular model, anticipates that this will take place. In fact this is how the majority of the pivot patterns discussed here are structured. Nevertheless there are patterns in which the central theme is not expressed at the core, that is, where there is no apparent link between the climax of the structure and the elements of the pivot. In all such examples the central idea is placed at the margins of the pattern, obviously for the purposes of emphasis. In the first, in which Eli causes Samuel to swear that he will divulge all that God reveals to him (1 Sam. 3.17), the principal question is situated both at the commencement and at the conclusion of the pattern, and this is an example of the expression of desire expressed by the repetition of words. In order to coerce Samuel into relating what he hears, he makes the young Samuel swear an oath. By locating the oath—curse at the centre of the structure the narrator wishes to emphasize its importance (see my analysis in Chapter 2 section 7). It is clear, however, that

254

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

the question 'What is this thing that the Lord said to thee?' constitutes the essence of the pattern under consideration, and the fact that this question is not situated at the centre of the structure but at its periphery indicates that this is done for emphasis. Possibly this phenomenon stems from Eli's confusion which gives rise to the repetition which we encounter at the margins of the pattern. The second type of structure, in which the core issue is not located at the centre of the pattern, also contains dialogue which results from embarrassment (2 Kgs 5.18). Na'aman, who comes to apologize to Elisha after being cured of leprosy as a result of his (Elisha's) counsel, experiences difficulty in expressing himself. As a consequence of his confusion he repeats, both at the commencement and at the closing of the pattern, what he has said: 'In this thing the Lord pardon thy servant'. These, in fact, are the most significant words spoken. At the centre, however, he explains the reason for his being compelled to come to, and bow down in, the house of Rimon. Here too as in the previous structure, it would appear that the bewilderment of the interlocutor gives rise to the precise reiteration of his words, for duplication of speech in different or similar words is particularly appropriate to the baring of emotions (see Zakovitch 1990: 11). In this structure, too, the main issues are situated at the extremities of the pattern and not at its centre. The reason (or the oath) is situated at the centre itself. Possibly the narrator designed these structures with the intention at the outset that there would be no co-ordination between the essence and the core, in order to illustrate the embarrassment of the speakers, which influenced the structure, and therefore the main idea is not cited at the pivot, a phenomenon which is unusual for these structures. I have encountered other structures where the essential idea is not situated at their climax. In the pivot pattern in 1 Sam. 17.51-54 the narrator's intention is to glorify David's heroic act in slaying Goliath, and he describes it both at the commencement and at the conclusion of the structure. At the centre, however, I find a description of the defeat of the Philistines which is a consequence of David's action: the Philistines are vanquished in battle by the children of Israel as a direct result of David's heroism. In the last two structures I find a chiastic heptastich (Zakovitch 1979: 536. See Amos 5.4-6), which places the stress not on the isolated fourth element but on the first element, which is repeated in the seventh.

7. Summary and Conclusions

255

In Hezekiah's prayer (2 Kgs 19.15-19), there is no doubt that the core issue of this structure is the plea for salvation from the Lord, so that they (the nations) will know that 'thou art the God, even thou alone' (v. 19). And this, situated at the periphery of the structure, serves to negate the fact which is situated at the centre of the pattern: 'Of a truth, Lord, the Kings of Assyria have destroyed the nations and their land' (v. 17), which reflects the reality of his time. The pivot pattern which describes the nature of Solomon's reign (1 Kgs 4.20-5.5) is created by an editor who has integrated two different genres (see my analysis of this particular structure [Chapter 3 section 9]). As a consequence of this integration there is a description of 'Solomon's provender' at the centre, a description which serves to glorify Solomon's kingship and to reflect the core idea situated at the periphery of the structure, the abundant wealth of his kingdom and his dominion over the nations. In the structure in which Na'aman's restoration to health is recounted (2 Kgs 5.8-15), the principal issue appears at the edges of the pattern once again ('and he shall know that there is a Prophet in Israel ... there is no God in all the earth but in Israel'): as in previous structures, that which is at the core of the pattern does not constitute its essence. I find the words of contempt expressed by Na'aman in order to stress the sharp volte-face which has taken place in his consciousness and his awareness at the conclusion of the pattern. Hushai's counsel to Absalom is described in an unconventional pattern, and includes two brief pivot patterns in effect linked through the medium of the peripheries and the core (see my analysis). In the structure I find a sentence which separates the rejection of Ahitophel's advice and his suggestion: Therefore I counsel'. This phenomenon in which a pivotal sentence occurs in the middle of a literary unit, and which stands alone without any chiastic parallelism, recurs in a significant proportion of the chiastic units in Scripture.4 I conclude therefore that in seven of the patterns the climax in fact does not reflect the ideastic core. If this is so, and the ideastic climax is not at the centre, why then are these sections structured in accordance with the pivot pattern? It would seem to me that, with the exception of the reason already mentioned (the embarrassment of the speaker), possibly another reason exists: I find that four of the structures deal with 4. Thus, e.g., in Isa. 1.21-26 at the centre of the unit: 'Therefore says the Master, the Lord of Hosts'. Cf. Loewenstarnm 1955: 28.

256

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

the glorification of certain figures—David, the Lord, Solomon and the prophet of the Lord. The author chose to achieve this by duplicating language at the periphery of the pattern rather than at its centre for the purposes of emphasis. In 2 Kgs 5.8-15 I find that presenting the climax at the extremities of the pattern allows the author to stress the difference between Elisha's reflection 'that there is a Prophet in Israel' and the genuine recognition expressed by Na'aman, the Gentile, 'that there is no god in all the earth'. It can be said therefore that two sub-categories of pattern exist in Scripture concerning the climax of the pattern: the conventional pattern, which is in the majority, in which the essential idea occurs at the centre of the structure, at its pivotal climax; and, in a minority, the main idea situated at the periphery, at the opening and at the closing of the pattern. 6. Symmetry and Lack of Symmetry in Pivot Patterns In terms of the definition of the pivot patterns format there are clearly delineated criteria, the repetition of words and expressions in parallel elements because the reiterated words in elements of the model have particular significance in conveying the message, and this is the single most important objective criterion in the revealing of the pattern. Concerning the iteration of words and expressions, the patterns are divided into two types: (1)

(2)

Structures in which the words and the expressions in the parallel elements are repeated only once, for example, 2 Kings 5.18, each expression recurring once only, and there is no further duplication in any of the other elements. Structures in which one word or expression in parallel elements is reiterated at least once more, as in the pattern in 2 Kgs 15.18-21, where the word 'Israel' occurs at the commencement of the pattern and recurs in parallel at its conclusion. But the word is also repeated in the fifth hemistich, without its being in parallel in any of the other hemistichoi.

I will attempt to examine in my discussions in this section whether parallelisms in adjacent lines, or the repetition of words, tend to attenuate the contention that the pattern exists. In eleven of the patterns (Judg. 7.17, 9.56-57, 18.16-17; 1 Sam. 8.79, 23.14-15, 31.9-10; 2 Sam. 3.36; 1 Kgs 4.20-5.5, 13.8-9, 16-17, 22;

7. Summary and Conclusions

257

2 Kgs 5.18, 15.18-21) no words are repeated in adjacent lines or in elements that are not parallel. I can therefore call these 'perfect pivot patterns' . But in the literature which is my concern it is not surprising to find a word or an expression which is repeated in consecutive lines without detracting, in my opinion, from the perfection of the pivot pattern, because even in these instances there are definite divisional criteria. These patterns, too, lend themselves to division into a number of categories: Patterns in which a Word is Repeated at the Centre and at the Periphery: In a number of patterns I find a verbal connection between the pivot and the extremities, apparently because the central idea which appears at the pivot is given additional emphasis by this iteration. This is the case in the dialogue between the man and Joab (2 Sam. 18.10-11). Absalom's having been seen by the man is the essential element here and is mentioned by him at the pivot. In the first hemistich this same fact is presented by the author, and finally by Joab. The subjective evidence given by the man and presented by him in contrast to the evidence spoken by the narrator (at the beginning) and by Joab (at the conclusion of the pattern) is of the utmost significance, in that he saw but he did nothing, and that is why this issue appears at the centre of the pattern. So too, with 2 Sam. 17.7-14; 2 Kgs 19.15-19. Structures in which There is Repetition of a Word or Phrase at the Centre and in Paired Parallel Elements, but not at the Peripheries Repetition at the Centre and in the Second Element As Well As in the Penultimate Element: In his prayer (2 Kgs 19.15-19) Hezekiah requests from God to redeem his kingdom from Assyria, so that the kingdoms of the earth will know the power of the Lord and his uniqueness. In the second element and its parallel (15, 19) I find his mention of 'all the kingdoms of the earth'. In the centre (17) Hezekiah mentions the kingdoms and the lands that were destroyed by the Assyrian kings. The saving of Judah in contrast to the annihilation of the countries of the gentiles attests to his greatness and uniqueness 'to all the kingdoms of the earth'. This is the case too with 1 Kgs 1.24-35.

258

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Patterns in which the Central Issue (Or Word), which Is Situated at the Pivot of the Pattern, Is Repeated in Two Paired Parallel Components and Not Only in a Single Pair. In the description of the Philistine defeat after the death of Goliath (1 Sam. 17.51-54) the Philistine dead are mentioned at the pivot of the pattern. These Philistines are recalled in the second parallel element, and Goliath the Philistine appears at the edges of the structure. Possibly in order to highlight their downfall, the narrator reiterates the name, Philistines at the pivot of the pattern. This occurs as well in 2 Samuel 12.16-20; 1 Kgs 17.2-7. Structures in Which Words are Repeated in Elements which Are Not Parallel At Times in an Adjacent Component and at Others in an Element Removed from the Original Element. In the pattern representing the Lord's decree to Elijah and its implementation, (1 Kgs 17.2-7) the phrase 'the word of the Lord' appears at the opening and at the centre of the structure, because it is a decree and its implementation. The implementation of the decree in accordance with the word of the Lord is presented at the climax of the pattern and is not mentioned in parallel in the final element. This format is encountered in 2 Sam. 6.20-22. Structures in which a Word is Repeated in the Initial Hemistichoi, but in the Majority of Cases Without Parallelism in the Parallel Component. In the second and third element of the pattern in which the conversation between David and Michal is described (2 Sam. 6.20-22) there are words derived from the triliteral radical 'he uncovered'; 'shamelessly uncovers himself—without appropriate parallelism in the opposite hemistich, despite the fact that I have found matching words in parallel hemistichoi and a similar radicalized verb'more lightly esteemed'—as in 1 Kgs 1.2. Structures in which a Word is Repeated at the End in Two Consecutive Elements. In Joab's utterances to David (2 Sam. 3.24-25) I find words from the radical in the final hemistich, as well as in the one preceding it. And this knowledge contains a double portion as it were: thou knowst Abner who came to get to know every detail of David's activities. This occurs too in 1 Sam. 3.17.

7. Summary and Conclusions

259

Structures in which a Word Recurs in the Penultimate Component As Well As in the One Before it: In Jonadab's speech to David (2 Sam. 13.32-33) the word 'king' is repeated in the two components mentioned above, but in different form: in the one instance the text reads 'my Lord the King', and in the hemistich succeeding it, the penultimate hemistich, 'the sons of the king'. There is a parallelism to 'the sons of the king' in the parallel component. 'My Lord the King' differs from its parallel because the addition of the words 'the king', apparently, constitutes a conventional version of the text (see my analysis). This is so also in 2 Kgs 5.8-15. Structures in which a Word Is Reiterated in Components that Are Not Parallel: In Hezekiah's prayer (2 Kgs 19.15-19) the words 'the land' or 'the earth' are repeated in the second and third line ('the kingdom's of the earth ; 'the land and there is no parallel. But the parallelism that does exist is that between the lines and which is expressed by means of a different word, taken from the triliteral radical This is also the case in 1 Kgs 2.31-34. Structures in which a Word or Phrase, which Does Not Recur in the Parallel Hemistich, but Appears in the Adjacent Line, to that in which the Word Or Phrase Occurs in Parallel. In the description of David's tribulation (2 Sam. 12.16-20) it is stated that David sees his servants in parallel to their fearing him (vv. 18, 19hemistichoi 3, 5). But in the sixth hemistich the statement 'David to his servants' appears again, possibly to emphasize that David relies on his servants to inform him regarding his son's condition, a fact that indicates in an alternative way how weak he is and how tragic his situation. To this end his name David is also emphasized a number of times in this pattern (and he is not called 'king' here, despite the fact that he is talking to his servants). See too 1 Kgs 2.31-34. A Structure in which a Word (Or Phrase) Occurs a Number of Times: In the description of David's oath (1 Kgs 1.24-35) the word 'king' recurs frequently, apparently to stress that David still functions as a king despite his age and his physical debilitation, and he appoints his heir. It would seem that the use of the words 'behold and 'now

260

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

permit an understanding of the absence of perfect symmetry in a number of patterns. a. In 2 Sam. 18.10-11 the word 'behold' occurs at the centre of the structure to indicate the fact that the man had witnessed the event at the time of its taking place. With the aid of this device the narrator creates a 'threefold' impression of what was witnessed— 'and he saw-I saw-you saw', spoken by the narrator, the man and Joab—in order to enhance the dramatic power of the story. b. The words 'and now' give rise to a lack of symmetry in certain of the structures. After Jonadab addresses David (2 Sam. 13.3233) by the title 'my lord1 and says that they have not 'slain all the young men the king's sons', he commences the second part of his speech (after the climax) with the words 'and now' to indicate a new issue or conclusion, and he repeats again the appellation 'my lord'. And therefore I find repetition in adjacent components. This occurs, too, in 2Kgsl9.15, 19. In conclusion: it would seem that even in those structures where the symmetry is not perfect, words reiterated in adjacent lines or in elements that are not parallel cannot weaken the model's character as long as there are sufficient stable criteria for division and a sufficient number of words which are repeated (but not in other elements) to show the parallel components of the pattern. The parallelisms within the different elements exist as does the comprehensive chiastic order with the pivot at its centre. We must remember that any literary format does not serve as a rigid and confining mould that restricts the author, but rather as a possibility for meaningful design (Polak 1994: 227). I have already cited the accepted psycholinguistic opinion that perceived sounds broadcast a message and that the auditor (and the reader) is able to decode them and to identify parallels and models such as the pivot pattern. Therefore imperfect symmetry is nevertheless symmetry and does not impair, in my opinion, the ability of the listener (and the reader) to identify the model. It should be understood that the biblical narrator composed these sections in the form of a pivot pattern intentionally and he uses uncommon words (where they do not adversely affect the symmetry of the model) and as well as high frequency words, where repetition cannot be avoided, even where the structures, in the main, are brief. Close examination reveals that the vast majority of the words that are

7. Summary and Conclusions

261

repeated but do not appear in parallel components are unexceptional.5 It is only in one pattern that infrequent words appear: 'he uncovered', 'he shamelessly uncovered' (2 Sam. 6.20). This discovery merely serves to reinforce my opinion that repetition of unexceptional words, which do not appear in parallel elements, are incapable of attenuating the character of the model. 7. Word Pairs and Word Combinations in Parallel Elements In accordance with the accepted method of parallelism in biblical (and Semitic) poetry, it is customary for two synonyms (or antonyms) to appear in two parallel hemistichoi, and occasionally the two words indicate the consideration of one issue. A type of established link is gradually formed between specific words and others, which are synonymic, a sort of acceptable convention, according to which a word appearing in the first hemistich of the verse tends to give rise to the choice of another specific word, a synonym for inclusion in the second hemistich, for example: head-skull; tent-dwelling; house-court; weepmourn; covenant-oath; flesh-meat; nation-kingdom; pride-glory; etc.6 It becomes clear that this convention of synonyms (or antonyms) existed in pivot patterns in the Former Prophets as well. Pairs of words which appear in parallel hemistichoi in biblical poetry and even those that appear consecutively in biblical prose are presented here as word pairs in parallel components of the pivot pattern. Periodically I find that a word pair that appears in biblical prose7 is split here into two separate words and each word occurs in the component parallel to the one in 5.

They are:

Israel, word, wadi, died, after, will reign, Philistines, I counseled, land, I saw, he saw, David, my father, and he dwelt, I know, king. 6. This method was known in Ugaritic literature, and many word pairs are common to both literatures. Cf. Cassuto 1958: 24-28; Avishur 1977: 11-37; 1984. Cf. Talmon on parallelisms in his article (1977: 128). 7. Cf. Melamed 1965. Zakovitch (1971: 43): The literary style of people whose poetry is structured on parallelism of hemistichoi, and maintained by designated word pairs ... the associative connection between synonyms and words of similar connotation is so close that at times they "think in word pairs" even when writing prose.'

262

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

which the other word is situated in the structure. It appears to me, therefore, that it is possible to conclude from this that there is no distinction between prose and poetry in the device under discussion, and word pairs appear in both poetry and prose without displaying a difference between them. The examples below serve to prove this contention. It seems that what applies to parallelism within hemistichoi applies equally to the pivot pattern. The author who determined that the word come (for example) should appear in one element is aware that it is incumbent upon him to use the verb return in the parallel element or, vice versa, if he started with the word return he would then have to use the verb come in the element parallel to it (cf. Cassuto 1958: 24). Pairs of words such as this can be either verbs or nouns as well as a noun and a verb together. It has been mentioned that this stylistic phenomenon where the first word of the synonymic word pair which appears in the initial hemistich of the parallel is an ordinary, functional word, in contrast the one which appears in the second hemistich is unusual and poetic (see Avishur 1977: 9-10). I have not found this to be the case in my examination of the word pairs which appear in the structures that follow, with two exceptions only (pursue-chase; rulesubdue) Before 1 present the word pairs and phrases I must point out that I have used word pairs that are not generally accepted in the research as 'word pairs', in this section. The text proves, however, in a thousand ways that they are in fact 'word pairs'. 1. Kinaesthetic Verbs I have found a number of verb pairs which indicate movement (kinaesthesia), where one component of the pair is the verb 'return' (in three of the structures), indicating in most instances a return to the status quo ante. (a)

come - return This word pair recurs in a number of pivot patterns in parallel between the elements both in the indicative or declarative form and as a decree and its implementation: Thus God made reparation for the wickedness of Abimelek and upon them came the curse of Jotham, the son of Jeruba'al (Judg. 9.56-57).

7. Summary and Conclusions

263

In 1 Kgs 13.8-9, 16-17 the order of the verbs 'come-return' appears. In the word of the Lord to the man from Judaea the order is reversed: 'but earnest back -shall not come' (1 Kgs 13.22). In 2 Kgs 5.8-15 I find: 'So Na'aman came' in contrast to 'And he returned to the man of God'. In 2 Kgs 15.18-21 'And Pul the King of Assyria came' in contrast to 'So the King of Assyria turned back1. This occurs too in the Balaam narrative (Num. 23.16-17) as in 1 Kings 13, the verb pair occurring in a decree and its implementation. (b) arise - return

In the pivot pattern encompassing the Philistines' defeat it is stated 'And the men of Israel arose' in contrast to 'And Israel returned from chasing after' (1 Sam. 17.52-53).

This verb pair appears in Josh. 8.19, 24, and 2 Kgs 3.24, 27 as well. (c) pursue - return in the pivot pattern dealing with the Philistine defeat, in the parallel between the elements: 'And the men of Israel arose ... and pursued the Philistines And the children of Israel returned from chasing after the Philistines' (1 Sam. 17.52-53). This verb pair appears in Josh. 10.10, 15, 21. I infer from this that the verb pair usually is presented in a predetermined order in which the verb 'returns' appears second in the order to indicate that the return from the action is in fact a return to the status quo ante. Even in 1 Kgs 13.22, where the order is 'and you shall return-shall not come', it is clear that the word of the Lord expressed in the imperative form 'shall not come' precedes 'and you will return', in time. In the Balaam narrative, and you will 'return', which occurs as the first verb, indicates a return to the status quo ante. In the story of Abimelek, and he 'returned', occurs as the first verb in the verb pair as this section deals with an instance of measure for measure, after which, the expression 'and the curse came' appears (d) pursued - chased after 'and the children of Israel rose up and pursued the Philistines And the children of Israel returned from chasing after the Philistines' (1 Sam. 17.52-53).

264

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

This is an additional word pair in which the verb 'pursue' appears as the first verb.8 But here, in contrast to the previous word pair, there is no return to the status quo ante, quite the reverse, as the verb reinforces the action of pursuing (cf. the Malbim: 'Not only this but also that'. This becomes apparent from two examples: 'and he pursued him' and 'and Jacob answered him and said, for you chased after me' (Gen. 31.22-23, 36). According to the narrator, Laban pursued, whereas in Jacob's perception of the incident pursuit becomes chasing after. Similarly inlsa. 5.11. (e) went - went down

This word pair is characteristic of the decree and its implementation. Thus also in the pivot pattern which provides the framework of the narrative of the healing of Na'aman: 'And Elisha sent a messenger to him saying, "Go and wash" ' (2 Kgs 5.10). And in the implementation: Then he went down, and dipped himself seven times' (2 Kgs 5.14). This occurs in Exod. 19.10, 14.

(f) goes down - comes up

'For he is gone down this day and has slaughtered oxen and 'Then you shall come up after him' (1 Kgs 1.25, 35). In this verb pair which expresses kinaesthesia, at least in the first verb, an expression appears in this section of the text indicating metaphorical kinaesthesia: 'for he went down this day'. This notwithstanding, the narrator, who is aware of the pair 'goes down-comes up', cites the verb 'comes up' in the parallel hemistich in this extended structure, which serves as the partner of the verb 'goes down', here with its literal meaning indicating movement: 'Then you shall come up after him'. The same verb pair occurs inlsa. 14.13-15.

8. Attention should be given to the fact that three word pairs appear in these verses: —rise up-return; pursue-return; pursue-pursue hotly.

7. Summary and Conclusions (g) wash - dip

265

'Go and wash in the Jordan seven times' and 'Then he went down and dipped himself seven times' (2 Kgs 5.10, 14).

In addition to the opinion (see Zakovitch 1985: 69-70) that the narrator exchanges the verb 'wash' as spoken by the prophet with the verb 'dip' in order to stimulate an additional association in the ceremony of his (Na'aman's) being healed from leprosy, 'shall dip ... and shall sprinkle ... seven times' (Lev. 14.16), the fact that the narrator uses the verb 'dips' as a partner for 'washes' in the biblical parallelism in the same way as it is expressed in the words of Job: 'If I wash myself ... yet shalt thou dip me in the ditch' (Job 9.30-31), cannot be ignored. 2. Verbs Indicating Speech It is to be expected that verbs characteristic of this pair should be taken from the triliteral radical which occurs in two word pairs: (h) say - appoint

'And Nathan said, My Lord, O King, hast thou said' and 'and I have appointed him to be ruler over Israel and over Judah' (1 Kgs 1.24, 35).

David wished to emphasize that while, as it were, he 'says' with reference to Adonijah and the throne, in the case of the crowning of Solomon he does not 'say', he 'appoints', and thus the change in the verb (cf. the stated command in 1 Kgs 1.24-35 in this study). This verb pair is known to us from other locations in the Bible: in the verbal form in Ps. 33.9, Lam. 3.37; and in nominal form in Ps. 119.172, Prov. 7.1. (i) say - relate

9.

this verb pair occurs in two pivot patterns: 'And the Lord said to Samuel ... in all that they say to thee' and 'Now you must hearken to their voice: but relate to them the customary practice of the king' (1 Sam. 8.7, 9); and in inverted order: 'and related it to Joab' 'And Joab said to the man that related it to him'9 (2 Sam. 18.10-11).

Attention should be given to the chiastic pattern: and he told and he said

and he said

who told

266

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

This verb pair appears in Pharoah's speech to Joseph (Gen. 41.24) and Isa. 46.10, and in the same order in 41.26 as well. It would seem that in prose passages the verb 'say' indicates the opening of a monologue or dialogue, the presentation of speech by the spokesman (usually first) in the conversation. The verb 'relate' (from the radical projecting the principal issues as well as the innovative aspect. In Deutero-Isaiah the order is always inverted (Isa. 48.20). 3. Verb Pairs Expressing Antithesis In two structures we have found verbs whose meanings are antithetical: (j) goes down - goes up these have already been analysed previously in example f. (k) is glorious - esteemed Even though this pair does not occur in parallel between the elements in the pivot pattern, it is clear that in contrast to the sarcastic comment of Michal, 'How glorious was the King of Israel today', David responds to her, 'and I will yet be more likely esteemed than this' (2 Sam. 6.20, 22). David answers her using these words, and particularly this verb, in order to contradict what she has said. This verb pair appears in other locations in Scripture: 1 Sam. 2.30; 1 Kgs 12.10; Isa. 8.23, 23.9, 49.5-6. 4. Verbs Indicating Continuity (1) reigns - has dominion over 'And Solomon reigned over all the kingdom for he had dominion over all the region on this side of the river' (1 Kgs 5.1, 4). This verb pair is found in Isa. 14.5-6, although these verbs are not situated in the same parallelism, but the contiguity between them indicates that they serve as a pair as in this section of the text. The conventional pair in the Bible is 'ruled over —reigned (Gen. 37.8; Ps. 105.20, 145.13).

7. Summary and Conclusions (m) eating - drinking

267

they ate and drank and were happy and dwelt every man under his vine and under his fig tree (1 Kgs 4.20; 5.5 cf. Mic. 4.4).

The eating and drinking and sitting under the vine and under the fig tree, indicate abundance and security. I have found this in 2 Kgs 18.31 (as also in Isa. 36.16). In this section of the text these paired verbs occur separately in parallel hemistichoi. 5. Word Pairs-Nouns The majority of the word pairs that appear in the pivot patterns in the Former Prophets consists of verbs, but there are a number of pairs that are made up of nouns. Initially I shall present a phrase which repeats itself a number of times even if it does not contain synonyms. (n) my lord - my lord the king 'Let not my lord suppose' and 'Now therefore let not my lord the king take this thing' (2 Sam. 13.32-33). Jonadab initially approaches the king using the title 'my lord' before his explanation to the king. Subsequent to this he addresses the king using the appellation 'my lord the king', in order to emphasize his (the king's) elevated position, when he repeats what he has said, as an inference ('Now therefore'). This pair recurs in 1 Sam. 26.18-19. And here too we encounter the phrase 'my lord the king' preceding the essence of this section of the text ('Now therefore'), and this is the case in 2 Sam. 19.20 as well. (o) bear - lion

'They are embittered like a bear robbed of its cub and even a warrior whose heart is the heart of a lion" (2 Sam. 17.9-10).

It would seem that these two beasts of prey are mentioned in 'one breath', when one of them is mentioned then the other is mentioned too, until they become a pair located close to one another or in parallel. Hushai's mentioning of these animals in his counsel to Absalom recalls the words of David to Saul (1 Sam. 17.36, see also 34). The word pair appears in the parallelism in Isa. 11.7 and in Amos 5.19, etc.

268

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

(p) horses and chariot - company 'And Na'aman came with his horses and with his chariot. And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company'' (2 Kgs 5.9, 15). The horse and chariot symbolize power. They represent military might (Exod. 15.1; Josh. 11.4; Isa. 31.1; Ezek. 26.7). The word 'company' also serves to indicate associations with military strength in the majority of cases (Judg. 4.15, 7.10; 1 Sam. 17.17; 2 Sam. 1.2). It is therefore not surprising that in the pivot pattern with the healing of Na'aman, these nouns alternate and appear in parallel: the desire to present the military power of Na'aman is expressed in v. 9, power which is not represented by actual human strength, but by weapons of war. And while the emphasis in the words 'with the company' is on human beings, Na'aman's men who are all witnesses and participants in the return to the man of God (cf. Zakovitch 1985: 73-74). I have encountered similar alternations in these phrases in Exod. 14.23-24. Here too, I find 'horse' and 'chariot' first to indicate military power, expressed by the narrator and reflecting the viewpoint of the Egyptians. But when the Lord looks down, he sees 'the company of the Egyptians', the human beings. The military power (horse and chariot) are nullified in his sight. From Josh. 11.4; 2 Kgs 7.7, 10; Zech. 14.15, it would seem that the horse is mentioned literally as part of the military company. And perhaps here as well the parallelism is alluded to, 'horse (and chariot)—company', a fact which gives rise to their becoming a pair in these sections of the text. 6. Pairs Comprising a Verb and a Noun On occasion, word pairs are created by the use of a verb and a noun, or a noun and a verb. They occur in parallel in the elements of the pivot pattern as well. (q) is angry - rage10

'But Na'aman was angry and he went, and he went away in a rage' (2 Kgs 5.11-12).

A similar pair, a verb and a noun, occurs in Est. 1.12, in Jer. 32.37 ('my rage-anger' —two nouns).

10. Additional and similar word pairs in the Bible: anger-rage 63.3; Prov. 15.1; Ps. 6.2, 37.8), wrath-ire (Ps. 102.11).

(Isa.

7. Summary and Conclusions

269

(r) Qerith - dries up 'and hide thyself by the Wadi Qerith' and 'and it came to pass after a while that the Wadi dried up' (1 Kgs 17.3, 7). Apparently in addition to the geographical link which exists between Yabesh and Qerith, Scripture acknowledges a clear linguistic connection between words derived from the triliteral radicals and those sections of the text in which the waters of the Jordan are mentioned, as in the Elijah narrative. Thus we read in Josh. 3.16, 'and those that came down toward the sea ... failed and were cut off (see Josh. 3.13; 4.7), where the splitting of the Jordan is discussed, in contradistinction to 4.23: 'dried up ... the waters of the Jordan from before you ... which he dried up before us' (see Josh. 4.21; 5.1). This geographic-linguistic link is not confined only to rivers, but occurs as well in the name Yabesh (Gilead). Thus we read in 1 Sam. 11.1, Then Nachash the Ammonite came up, and encamped against Jabesh-Gilead and they said ... make a league with us and we will serve you', and I find this parallel in 1 Sam. 31.9, 11, 'And they cut off his head and when the inhabitants of Yabesh -Gilead heard'. Even with issues where the topic is not geographical in nature, I find this linguistic connection (Isa. 56.3, 5): 'neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree' and 'I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off The parallel between the eunuch's words and the prophet's response is based upon the link between the words In addition to the word pairs already mentioned I have discovered specific forms of nouns and verbs or two forms of one verb appearing in the parallel structures similar to what has been found in Scripture generally and in Ugaritic literature, as they appear in poetic parallel. 7. Verb Combinations from the Same Radical In the same conjugation, but in a different tense, occasionally we encounter two forms of one verb in the perfect and in the imperfect tenses in two hemistichoi of a scriptural verse, for example, 'and it devoured the great deep, and was e a t u p the land' (Amos 7.4). This florid phraseology, which is accepted in biblical literature,11 occurs in parallel elements of the pivot pattern as well.

11. Also in Ugaritic literature. See Cassuto (1958: 37).

270

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

(s) made reparation - did requite Thus God made reparation for the wickedness of Abimelek ... did God requite upon their heads' (Judg. 9.5657). Occasionally verbs derived from the same radical, but which occur in different conjugations, are found in parallel hemistichoi or in biblical prose. Periodically in order to vary the meaning (passive voice or active voice), we encounter the use of the active form of the verb in the causative conjugation (hiphil) succeeded by a verb in qal, as if to indicate the results of the action which were alluded to by the initial form of the verb.12 (t) return - return

'and the Lord shall return his blood upon his head' and 'their blood shall therefore return upon the head of Joab' (1 Kgs 2.32-33).

Here, too, the action is expressed by the second verb (in the qal) that results from the action indicated by the first verb (in the hiphil, causative conjugation). I have found this too in Ps. 51.14-15, 'Restore ... shall return ', and in Lam. 5.21, 'Turn us to thee, O Lord, and we shall be turned'.13

At times I find two verbs from different radicals, the verbs being homonymic. The narrator exploits this by linking parallel elements into a pivot pattern. These pairs are also found in scriptural poetry. 8. Two Verbs which Are Alike in Sound but which Differ in Meaning (u) see - fear

A combination of verbs whose sound is the same (in the plural) and whose radical and meaning are entirely different: 2 Sam. 12.18-19: 'And the servants of David feared to tell him But when David saw that his servants whispered'. This pair also occurs in Deut. 28.10, 2 Sam. 10.19 and in Job 6.21.

12. See Jer. 17.14; Ps. 19.13-14. With additional examples in Cassuto 1958: 38. 13. Cf. 'Heal me, O Lord, and I shall be healed' (Jer. 17.14); 'Again I will build thee and thou shalt be built, O virgin of Israel' (Jer. 31.3).

7. Summary and Conclusions

271

Apparently these verbs became verb combinations as a result of their similar sound and the play on words which they create. Sometimes these word combinations, comprising a verb and a noun, or a noun and a verb (from a similar or identical radical), occur. They appear in parallelism in the elements of the pivot pattern as well. 9. Two Radicals which Are Similar in Meaning (v) good - please

'And all the people took notice of it and it pleased them ... pleased all the people' (2 Sam. 3.36).

This represents the utilization of two radicals which complement one another but express the same meaning. The triliteral radical (a defective [pe yod yod] verb) conjugated in the imperfect tense and complemented in the perfect and present tenses by the triliteral radical (a defective ['ayin waw] verb). The noun (the present tense considered as a noun) occurs in Hos. 10.1 and in Est. 2.9. It is clear that the scribes who wrote the patterns under consideration chose appropriate words and phrases that complement one another, as was customary and accepted in the literary tradition. When they chose a word constituting a part of a pair in the first section of the pattern, they wrote the second word in the pair in the second section of the structure and in parallel with the elements. By so doing the scribes afforded the reader the opportunity to discern a verbal or a nominal pair or a word combination with their meaning, as the reader recalls them from other sections of the Bible, and this by repetitive reading of the text. It must be remembered that parallelism of the hemistichoi, which is a fundamental technique of biblical authors, should not be related to simply as ornamentation, but should be understood as a first principle in the structuring of scriptural poetry and, to a certain extent as well, of biblical prose. Parallelism of hemistichoi, which differs from iteration of the same word twice, also serves to emphasize, but is not simply a superfluous stylistic piquancy but rather a methodical cognitive approach. Parallelism of hemistichoi and the tendency to reiterate ideas by changing words or morphological forms is a consequence of the thought processes inherent in Hebrew and Semitic languages which give expression to a literary approach which spreads throughout all the creative genres of scriptural literature (Talmon 1977: 128). Therefore word pairs and word combinations such as these which occur in both

272

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

sections of the pattern, in parallel, reinforce one another, creating additional meaning and contributing to a profounder understanding of the structure. 8. Patterns Exhibiting Ordered Repetition The unity of the pivot pattern inheres in the fact that the elements which are not of even number lie on both sides of the pivot, in parallel and in inverted order. The narrator ends with what he began. In two cases I have discovered that this order, partially or completely, does not apply, and these elements are repeated in identical order. This then is a secondary model of the pivot pattern. In an instance where all the parallel elements are reiterated in similar order, composed of Jonadab's message to David (2 Sam. 13.32-33) (see Chapter 5 section 2), Jonadab's words do not occur in inverted order but as a complete parallelism, as he calrris David by saying that not all of his sons have died but that Amnon is the only victim. It is clear that this detail must come at the end of what he says. Therefore the order of the elements is unchanged. In another structure I find that only two elements are in parallel in identical order. In the pivot pattern which recurs three times (1 Kgs 13.8-9, 16-17, 22) (see Chapter 2 section 3) a prohibition and its implementation (or negation) in unchanged order occurs: 'neither will I eat bread nor drink water' occurs in parallel with 'thou shalt eat no bread nor drink water' (8-9). This order, it should be mentioned, is the conventional one in the Bible for these actions, that, is 'eat' first and 'drink' second,14 and in the examples cited above this is also the case. It is possible that this order is preserved for two reasons. First, the inverted order of these verbs ('drink and eat') is never encountered and only 'eat and drink' occurs. The narrator also maintains this order, which was conventional. Secondly, possibly the order of the actions is repeated in order to exhibit the complete obedience of the prophet to the instruction given by the Lord in that he carries it out to the letter (or refrains from doing so). As I have already indicated a number of times in my study, a literary model does not hang like the sword of Damocles forcing the author to 14. See Exod. 34.28; 1 Sam. 30.12; Jer. 22.15; Eccl. 2.24, 3.13; etc.

7. Summary and Conclusions

273

be restricted slavishly by it. The author can deviate from the conventional, when his meaning is more elegantly expressed than the form allows. 9. Redactional Patterns The majority of the pivot patterns in my study were constructed as organic patterns by the skilful hand of the narrator. In some of them, however, or so it would appear to me, they are the direct result of deliberate editorial intervention, and hence the editor's work is no less important or less skilled than that of the narrator. Obviously, editors who were aware of these particular literary models fashioned their artistic creation by embodying literary patterns familiar to them. The pivot pattern in 1 Kgs 4.20-5.5 contains the narrator's words in which he gives a summation of the nature of Solomon's regime, his dominion over the nations and the children of Israel's dwelling in security and peace, and a list of 'Solomon's provision for the day' (5.2) at the climax of the pattern. It is clear that there is here conscious editorial intervention in the narration. It is a fact that the integration of these two fundamentals, two distinct literary genres, the historical tale and a 'dry' genealogical list, constitute the pattern under discussion. In the description of Menachem ben Gadi's reign (2 Kgs 15.18-21) I find an integrational synthesis of two types of literature: an historiographic account of Menachem's activities when the king of Assyria invaded Israel and an evaluation of Menachem's religiosity by the Deuteronomic redactor. The editor synthesizes and casts the different material available to him into one episode, embodied in his own style and that of the pivot pattern. From the examples which I have quoted in my book15 it is not always possible to identify the editor or the narrator and to distinguish between them; a narrator may become an editor, and an editor may become a narrator. But it is abundantly clear that this literary tradition of the model under discussion utilizes both of these.

15. I have not dwelt in this section on structures which are organic, despite the fact that there are those researchers who believe that they are an editor's addenda. E.g. Judg. 18.16-17, 1 Sam. 23.14-15.

274

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets 10. Textual Witnesses to the Pivot Patterns

In this section I discuss the structure of the patterns in comparison to a number of textual witnesses, the most significant of which are the book of Chronicles, the ancient translations, specifically LXX, as well as the Dead Sea Scrolls in which scriptural texts occur and where certain of the structures in my study are present. Only examples and incidents in which the identity of the pivot pattern is abundantly clear and where the preferred version is obvious are utilized. Occasionally the reconstruction of the model is nothing more than a result of a textual correction undertaken because of interpretational difficulties in one or another section of the text, a correction enjoying the confirmation of comparison with an ancient textural witness (Zakovitch 1979: 31). Familiarity with the model assists therefore in reinforcing a particular version, where an alternative version based on other textural witnesses diverges in any way from the MT. A knowledge of the various types of patterns provides the tools for a complete identification of the preferred version even when the two versions present no difficulty (Zakovitch 1979: 32). Thus I find in the pivot pattern in 1 Sam. 17.51-54 a change from to ('ravine' to 'Gath') (52), which creates a similar word to the word 'Gath' in the parallel element. Apparently, the meaning was not a ravine which existed between the two camps, because had this been the case it would have required 'the ravine'. What is indicated here is a particular place and the LXX versions, both Vaticanus and Lucianus, ar apparently correct, as is mentioned in the continuation of the verse, and it creates a parallel in the pivot pattern (cf. Segal 1964). In other structures, which are not complete, the reconstruction is made on the basis of other sections of biblical text and this creates a drawing together of the sections. In 1 Sam. 23.14-15 I find a pattern which includes a series of verbs illustrating man's flight from his pursuer. There are parallels to this series of words in Scripture, where the final verb is 'he returned '. In the structure mentioned the verb 'he returned' is missing, and it would seem that it has been deleted here, but should have appeared as in other locations in the Bible (as in Exod. 2.14-15). This reconstruction creates a synthesis within the structure by means of a clear link between the final and the first element.

7. Summary and Conclusions

275

In 1 Sam. 31.9-10 I find, at the conclusion of the pattern, the words 'his body' in contrast to the words 'his head' at its commencement. However, in the parallel version in 1 Chron. 10.10 it would seem that the original version occurs that enhances the connection between the elements: the words 'and his skull' in place of 'his body' in parallel to 'his head'. As I have already stated the version in Chronicles would appear to be the original one. I turn now to a number of examples where the adjustments made to them are not acceptable, based on textural witnesses. In the pivot pattern in 2 Sam. 6.20-22 the verb ['lightly esteemed') is translated in LXX as the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew (22) ('uncovered myself) in order to create a verb parallelism from the same radical 'that he uncovered himself... shamelessly uncovers himself) in the parallel hemistich (20). It would seem to me that the MT is preferable here in that 'lightly esteemed' is parallel to 'holding lowly' in that which follows and to 'had in honour' at the end of the verse. In a number of structures we encounter changes that initially seem to disrupt the pivot pattern. In 2 Sam. 3.36 the word is missing at the conclusion of the verse in certain of the translations (LXX VV, the Peshitta, the Vulgate and 4QSama) (but it is found in LXX A and in Hexapla). It would seem that the word was deleted in the version available to the scribe, and as a result of this the structure was disrupted, in that there was no parallel to the first hemistich. In addition to which, if we accept the version of the translations, the phrase 'in the eyes [of all] the people' would be redundant.16 In the description of the plundering of the holy vessels by the children of Dan (Judg. 18.16-17) I find in LXX VV that the majority of v. 17 is missing (from the words 'came thither'). In any case, it is impossible to speak here of a pivot pattern. Commentators maintain, as a result of this 'deletion', that there is a duplication of the expression 'six hundred men girded with weapons of war', a type of comparative ending. It would appear that this opinion, however, is unacceptable. It appears to me that this is a case of expressions indicating simultaneity. This is an instance of repetitive linkage: at the time that the spies take

16. See the detailed analysis of this structure in Chapter 3 section 8 of this study.

276

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

the holy vessels, 600 men wait at the opening to the gate.17 Apparently the scribe deleted the phrase, because it appeared to him that it was duplicated.18 LXX VV differs radically from MT in 1 Kgs 4.20-5.5. The order of the verses is different. Verse 20 in MT opens thus, 'Judah and Israel were many, as the sand', while in LXX it is stated, 'and there was one governor in the land of Judah'. Subsequent to this, the name 'Israel' does not appear at all but the name of Jehoshaphat son of Paruah of Issachar is mentioned, his name having been mentioned in MT prior to this in v. 17. In LXX the Greek equivalent of the phrase 'from Tifsah to Gaza, over all the kings on this side of the river' (5.4) and vv. 1,5 in the same chapter are omitted. The version as it occurs in LXX precludes any possibility of a pivot pattern, as it appears in MT, in this section. There appears to be an error in the LXX text. It would not seem that, subsequent to the author's writing a brief summary 'and one governor was in the land' (4.19), and in the LXX version 'Judah', he would pass over to the name of the governor, Issachar. In the MT the order is logical, the list of governors concludes with 'and one governor was in the land', apparently applying to the governor appointed over the whole land [but not necessarily so for it is possible that what was intended was the land of 'Judah', which appears at the commencement of the adjacent verse],19 the head of the governors, who was apparently Azariah ben Nathan (v. 5). In this way, the opening of this section, 'Judah and Israel were many', is appropriate to that which follows, and the LXX version becomes unacceptable. Possibly the deletion in LXX results from a 'literary mishap'. I h a v e indicated here a number of patterns whose translations in LXX reflects an erroneous reading of the text. The correct version, that of MT, is appropriate to the requirements of the model and therefore is preferable.

17. See my analysis of this structure in Chapter 3 section 6. 18. The phrase 'and the Priest stood [in the opening gate]' occurs in LXX VV in the following verse. 19. 'Above and below', or perhaps the word has been deleted because of its being identical to the word subsequent to it. Cf. De Vries 1985: 65.

7. Summary and Conclusions

211

11. Consequences of the Pivot Patterns It seems that my study may encourage research into this pattern as it occurs in other biblical books, as well as its investigation in other literary genres (such as law, prophecy, poetry, genealogical lists), which either do not occur at all, or seldom occur, in the Former Prophets. It proves that the pattern is a frequent element in the Bible, and the biblical author (and at times the editor) utilizes it when he desires to emphasize the central idea at the pivot of the pattern (in the majority of cases, but also, at times at its periphery). A number of examples of this occur in Chapter 6 of my study. The continuation of this research may well lead to the discovery of tens of additional patterns in the Torah, in the Latter Prophets and in the Writings, that have not yet been 'exposed' by researchers and still await their 'saviour'. In biblical literary research a number of formative elements have been revealed that can in my opinion be defined as literary structures, such as parallelism of hemistichoi, the chiastic pattern, 'about three and about four', merismus; and these have enjoyed extensive research (see the introductory chapter section 1). It would appear to me that the model which has been given consideration in my study, the pivot pattern, has not enjoyed thorough research until now, and in fact comprehensive research into the pattern has not been conducted until the publication of this study. The Bible is a literary text which deserves to be examined in accordance with the strictest criteria of literary investigation. Therefore my purpose in this study, which deals with the stylistic aspects of the biblical texts, was concentrated on the small, isolated literary unit, rather than on its function in the broad vistas of the text. It is structured and complete with all its component parts serving its general aim. Possibly enhancing understanding of this restricted isolated unit will serve to increase our understanding of more extensive units consisting of isolated literary units. Because I have found that at times the pattern is the work of the editor's hand which shapes various literary units, occasionally of different genres, and unites them into a pivot pattern, my research will contribute in part to the discovery of formative structures which are the fruits of the labours of an editor or a compiler and not only those of the narrator. My research represents a contribution which goes beyond the boundaries of literary style and, to a certain extent, also investigates the

278

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

various versions of the text, particularly in comparison with LXX and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Awareness of this model will assist in establishing the correct version in cases where one of the textual variations digresses from, or contradicts, the MT and reinforces the link between the elements of the formative structure under discussion. Recognizing the various types of model provides the wherewithal to identify the preferred version. In other words, research into literary patterns serves a purpose regarding versions of the text as well. There is a contribution to the understanding of the text in the structures which I have analyzed as well as to interpretations of patterns and linguistic combinations. Hopefully, my research will continue to shed light on 'the Bible as literature', because the majority of the work is still to be done in the area of precise and exact literary analysis (cf. Zakovitch 1982a: 29), and might encourage others to become involved in the research of additional formative patterns in Scripture, not necessarily those in which repetitive or contrastive patterns constitute the clear basis of the structure, but in other areas in which there has been insufficient research to date.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abarbanel, I. 1520 Abramsky, S. 1977a 1977b 1980

Commentary to the Bible (in Hebrew) (Pesaro) (rev. edn, Jerusalem: Keter, 1955). 'The Practice of Art and Historiography in the Narrative of David's Reign' (in Hebrew), BetMiqra 71: 453-72. The Kingdom of Saul and the Kingdom of David (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Shikmona & Ben Gurion University Press). The Leadership of Abimelek: The King the Prince and the Governor' (in Hebrew), in A. Even Shushan and B.R. Luria (eds.), The Shalom Sivan Book (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sepher): 163-76.

Abramsky, Shu. 1980 The Woman who Looks through the Window' (in Hebrew), Bet Miqra 81:114-24. Ackroyd, P.R. 1977 The Second Book of Samuel (CBC; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Ahlstrom, G.W. 1978 'KRKR and TPD', VT28: 100-102. Albright, W.F. 1953 'Some Canaanite-Phoenician Sources of Hebrew Wisdom', VT 3: 3-10. Alonso Schokel, L. 1961 'Erzahlkunst im Buche der Richter', Bib 42: 148-58. 1988 A Manual of Hebrew Poetics (Roma: Pontificio Institute Biblico). Alter, R. 1988 The Art of the Biblical Narrative (in Hebrew) (Tel Aviv: Adam). 1991 'Characterization and the Art of Reticence', in D.J.A. Clines and T. Eskenazi (eds.), Telling Queen Michal's Story (JSOTSup, 119; Sheffield: JSOT Press): 64-73. Amir, D. 1987 Gods and Heroes: Canaanites Epics from Ugaritic (in Hebrew) (Kibbutz Dan). Amit, Y. 1987a The Dual Causality Principle and its Effects on Biblical Literature', VT 37: 385-400. 1987b The Narrative of Samuel's Sanctification as a Prophet in the Light of Prophetic Meditation' (in Hebrew), in B.Z. Luria (ed.), The Goldstein Book (Jerusalem: Kana): 29-36.

280

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets 1991

'Hidden Polemic in the Narrative of the Conquest of Dan, Judges 17-18' (in Hebrew), BetMiqra 126: 267-78. 1992a The Affair of the Concubine in Geba in Hidden Polemics' (in Hebrew), BetMiqra 129: 109-118. 1992b The Book of Judges: The Art of Editing (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute). Andersen, F.I., and D.N. Freedman Amos (AB; New York: Doubleday). 1989 Ararat, N. 'The Amnon and Tamar Story' (in Hebrew), Bet Miqra 95: 331-57. 1983 Auld, A.G. 1, 2 Kings (Philadelphia: Westminster Press). 1986 Avishur, Y. 'KRKR in Biblical Hebrew and in Ugaritic', VT26: 254-61. 1976 The Construct State of Synonyms in Biblical Rhetoric (in Hebrew), 1977 (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sepher). Stylistic Studies of Word-Pairs in Biblical and Ancient Semitic 1984 Literatures (Kevelaer: Butzon and Bercker). Bar-Efrat, S. The Art of the Biblical Story (in Hebrew) (Tel Aviv: Sifriat Poalim). 1979 'Some Observations on the Analysis of Structure in Biblical Narrative', 1980 VT30: 154-73. 'The Story of the Succession of David's Throne: A New Investigation of 1983 an Accepted Assumption' (in Hebrew), in Y. Zakovitch and A. Rofe (eds.), I.L. Seeligmann Book (Jerusalem: E. Rubinstein): 185-211. Barrera, J.T. 'Jeroboam y la asemblea de Siquen', EstBib 38: 189-220. 1979 Bartal, A. The Kingdom of Saul (in Hebrew) (Tel Aviv: Hakibbutz Hameuchad). 1982 Ben David, A. Biblical Hebrew and Mishnaic Hebrew (in Hebrew) (2 vols.; Tel Aviv: 1967 Dvir). Bendor, Sh. 1986 The Bet-Ab in Israel from the Settlement to the End of the Monarchy (in Hebrew) (Oranim: Sifriat Poalim and Hakibbutz Hameuchad). Bengel, J.A. 1742 Genomon Novi Testamenti (Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr). Berlin, A. 1982 'On the Bible as Literature', Prooflexts 2: 323-27. Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative (Bible and Literature 1983 Series, 9; Sheffield: Almond Press). Bertheau, E. Das Buch der Richier und Ruth (Leipzig: Weidmann). 1883 Bertholet, A. Leviticus (Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr). 1901 Bettenzoli, G. 'Samuel und das Konigtun', BZ 30: 222-36. 1986

Bibliography

281

Blenkinsopp, J. 1966 Theme and Motif in the Succession History: 2 Sam. 11.2ff. and the 'Jahwist Corpus', VTSup 15: 44-57. Boling, R.G. 1984 'Levitical History and the Role of Joshua', in C.L. Meyers and M. O'Connor (eds.), The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth (essays in honor of D.N Freedman; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbraums): 241-61. Boogaart, T.A. 1985 'Stone for Stone: Retribution in the Story of Abimelek and Shechem', 750732:45-46. Bowman, K G. 1985 The Crisis of King David: Narrative Structure, Compositional Technique and the Interpretation of 2 Samuel 8 (15)-20 (26) (Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms Press). Boys, T. 1825 Key to the Book of Psalms (London: S.L. Seely and Sons). Breck, J. 1987 'Biblical Chiasmus Exploring Structure for Meaning', BTB 17: 70-74. Brenner, A. 1985 The Israelite Woman: Social Role and Literary Type in Biblical Narrative (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press). 1988 Ruth and Naomi (in Hebrew) (Oranim: Sifriat Poalim and Hakibbutz Hameuchad). Briggs, C.A. 1914 Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms (ICC; 2 vols.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark). Brin, G. 1971 'The First Born Son in Israel in Biblical Times' (in Hebrew) (Dissertation; Tel Aviv University). Brueggemann, W 1990 First and Second Samuel (BCFP; Louisville: John Knox). Buber, M.M. The Prophets (in Hebrew) (Tel Aviv: Bialik Institute and Dvir). 1961 1964 The Biblical Way (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute). Budde, K. Die Bttcher Richter und Samuel (Giessen: Ricker). 1890 Das Buch der Richter (Leipzig: Mohr Verlag). 1897 Bullinger, E.W. Key to the Book of Psalms (London: Oxford University Press). 1890 Burney, C.F. The Book of Judges (New York: Ktav, 1903 repr.). 1970a The First Book of Kings (New York: Ktav, 1903 repr.). 1970b Buttenweiser, M. The Psalms (New York: Ktav). 1969 Caird, G.B. Interpretation Bible (New York: Abingdon Press). 1953 Carlson, R.A. David: The Chosen King (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell). 1964

282

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Cassuto, U. 1943 1954 1958 1965

1990 Ceresko, A.R. 1985

The Epic Poem in Israel' (in Hebrew) Knesset 8: 121-42. 'Beit-El' (in Hebrew) Biblical Encyclopedia, 2: 63-67. The Goddess Anath (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 3rd edn). A Commentary on the Book of Exodus (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 4th edn). The 'Quaestio' of the Book of Genesis (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Magnes Press). 'A Rhetorical Analysis of David's Boast, 1 Sam. 17.36-37', CBQ47: 6566.

Chamiel, H. 1967 '1 Samuel Ch. 8' (in Hebrew), Bet Miqra 30: 67-82. Clark, D.J. 'Criteria for Identifying Chiasm', LB 35: 63-72. 1975 Coats, G.W. Rebellion in the Wilderness (Nashville: Abingdon Press). 1968 Cogan, M., and H. Tadmor 2 Kings (AB; New York: Doubleday. 1988 Cohn, R.L. 'Form and Perspective in 2 Kings 5', VT 33: 171-84. 1983 Conroy, C. Abshalom Abshalom! (Rome: Biblical Institute Press). 1978 'A Literary Study of 2 Sam. 17.1-14', in D. Zamora (ed.), El misterio de 1983 la palabra: Homenaje a L.A. Schokel (Madrid: Ediciones Cristiandad). Corvin, J.W. -'A Stylistic and Functional Study of the Prose Praise in the Historical 1972 Narratives of the Old Testament' (Dissertation; Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms International). Cripps, R.S. A Critical Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Amos (London: SPCK). 1969 Criisernann, F. 'Zwei alttestamentliche Witze (1 Sam. 21:11-15 und 2 Sam. 6:20-23)', 1980 Z4W92:215-27. Culley, R.C. Studies in the Structure of Hebrew Narrative (Missoula, MT: Fortress 1976 Press). Dahood, M. Psalms. I. (1-50) (AB; New York: Doubleday). 1966 'Double Duty Modifier', CBQ 29: 574-82. 1967 'Chiasmus in Job: A Text-Critical and Philological Criteria', in H.N. 1974 Bream, R.D. Heim and C.A. Moore (eds.), Old Testament Studies in Honour ofJ.M. Myers (Philadelphia: Temple University Press): 119-30. 'Chiasmus', IDBSup, I: 145. 1976

Bibliography 283

283

Dahood, M., and T. Penar 1972 'Ugaritic Hebrew Parallel Pairs', in L.R. von Fisher (ed.), Ras Shamra Parallels: The Texts from Ugarit and the Hebrew Bible (Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum): 371-82. De Boer, B.A. 1956 Second Isaiah's Message (OTS, 2; Leiden: E.J. Brill). The Counsellor (VTSup, 3; :Leiden: E.J. Brill): 42-59. 1960 De Tarragon, J.M. 'David et Larche; 2 Sam 6', RB 86: 514-23. 1979 De Vries, S.J. Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans). 1975 1 Kings (WBC; Waco, TX: World Books). 1985 1-2 Chronicles (FOTL; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans). 1989 De Waard, J. The Chiastic Structure of Amos 5 1-17', VT27: 170-77. 1977 Di Marco, A. 'Der Chiasmus in der Bibel', LB 36: 21-73. 1975 'Der Chiasmus in der Bibel', LB 44: 3-70. 1979 Dozeman.T.B. The Way of the Man of God from Judah: True and False Prophecy in the 1982 Pre-Deuteronomic Legend of I Kings 13', CBQ 44: 379-93. 'OT Rhetorical Criticism', ABD, V: 712-15. 1992 Driver, S.R. Some Notes on the Hebrew Text and the Topography of the Books of 1960 Samuel (Oxford: Clarendon Press). Efal, I. 1982 The End of the Kingdom of Israel' (in Hebrew), in A. Malamat (ed.), The History of Israel: The Age of the Monarchies. Political History (Tel Aviv: Am Oved): 121-30. Ehrlich, A.B. Randglossen (in Hebrew) (Leipzig: Hinricks). 1900 Eslinger, L. The Kingship of God in Crisis (JSOTSup, 10; Sheffield: Almond Press). 1985 Even, Y. A Dictionary of Literary Terms (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Academon). 1978 Ewald, H. The History of Israel (London: Longmans, Green, 3rd edn). 1878 Fenton, T.L. 'pb' ([attendant] in Hebrew), Biblical Encyclopedia, V: 1045-46. 1968 Fishbane, M. Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press). 1985 Flanagan, J.W. A Study of the Biblical Traditions Pertaining to the Foundation of the 1971 Monarchy in Israel (Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms Press). Fokkelman, J.P. 1975 Narrative Art in Genesis (Assen: Van Gorcum).

284

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets 1981 1986 1990 1993

Forbes, J. 1854

Fraenkel, L. 1971

Narrative Art and Poetry in the Books of Samuel. 1. King David (Assen: Van Gorcum). Narrative Art and Poetry in the Books of Samuel. 2. The Crossing Fates (Assen: Van Gorcum). Narrative Art and Poetry in the Books of Samuel. 3. Throne and City (Assen: Van Gorcum). Narrative Art and Poetry in the Books of Samuel. 4. Vow and Desire (Assen: Van Gorcum). The Symmetrical Structure of Scripture or the Principles of Structure Parallelism Exemplified in an Analysis of the Decalogue, the Sermon on the Mount and Other Passages of the Sacred Writings (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark). 'Antithesis: A Literary Device' (in Hebrew), in B. Uffenheimer (ed.), The Bible and Jewish History: Studies in Bible and Jewish History Dedicated to the Memory ofj. Liver (Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University): 129-46.

Freedman, D.N. 'Preface', in J.W. Welch (ed.), Chiasmus in Antiquity (Hildesheim: Ger1981 stenberg Verlag): 7-8. Frisch, A. 'Structure and its Significance: The Narrative of Solomon's Reign in the 1986 Book of Kings' (in Hebrew) (PhD Thesis; Ramat-Gan: Bar-Han University). 'Structure and its Significance: The Narrative of Solomon's Reign 1991 (1 Kings 1-12.24)', JSOT51: 3-14. Fritz, V. 'Abimelek und Sichem in Jdc. 9', VT 32: 127-44. 1982 Galil, G. 'Leviticus 24.10-23', in B.A. Levin (ed.), Encyclopaedia of the Biblical 1987 World (in Hebrew) (Ramat Gan: Revivim): 177-79. Garsiel, M. The Dispute between Samuel and the Nation Regarding the Question of 1981 the Crowning of a King in Israel' (in Hebrew), Bet Miqra 87: 325-43. The First Book of Samuel: A Literary Study of Comparative Structures 1983 Analogies and Parallels (in Hebrew) (Ramat Gan: Revivim). Midrashic Name Derivations in the Bible (in Hebrew) (Ramat Gan: 1987 Revivim). 'Midrashic Name Derivations in the Narrative Cycle about Elijah and 1989 Ahab' (in Hebrew), in B.Z. Luria (ed.), The Gevariahu Book (2 vols.; Jerusalem: Kiriat Sepher): I, 149-55.

Geiger, A. 1972 Gelender, S. 1983

The Bible and its Translations in Relation to the Internal Development of Judaism (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 2nd edn). "The Connection between Devices of Form and the Ideastic Topic: Theological—Monarchistic Ideology in 2 Samuel 1-8' (in Hebrew) (PhD dissertation; Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University).

Bibliography 1990

Geller, S.A. 1979 Gerleman, G. 1973 Gesenius, W.L. 1949 1960 Gluck, J.J. 1963 Glueck, N. 1949 Goldberg, L. 1953 Gooding, D.W. 1982

Gordon, C.H. 1961

1965 Gray, J. 1964 Greenberg, M. 1982 1983 Gruber, M.I. 1981 Gunn, D.M. 1976 1978

1980 1981

285

The Slander of the Wicked in the Book of Psalms (in Hebrew) (Tenth World Congress of Jewish Studies; Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies): 37-42. Parallelism in Early Biblical Poetry (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press). 'Die Wurzel slm', ZAW 85: 1-14. Handworterbuch (Berlin: Springer-Verlag). Hebrew Grammar (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 6th edn [1910]). 'Nagid—Shepherd', VT 13: 144-50. East Jordan (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute). F. Petrarka (in Hebrew) (Merchavia: Hakibbutz Ha'arzi). 'The Composition of the Book of Judges', in B. Mazar (ed.), Orlinsky Book (Eretz Israel, 16; Kiriat Sepher: The Israel Exploration Society): 7778. 'David the Dancer', in M. Haran (ed.), Y. Kaufmann Jubilee Volume (Jerusalem: Magnes Press): 46-49. Ugaritic Text Book (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute). Kings (OTL; London: SCM Press). 'Prayer' (in Hebrew), Biblical Encyclopedia, VIII: 896-922. Biblical Prose Prayer as a Window to the Popular Religion of Ancient Israel (Berkeley: University of California Press). 'Ten Dance: Derived Expressions in the Hebrew Bible', Bib 62: 328-46. Traditional Composition in the Succession Narrative', VT 26: 214-29. The Story of King David (JSOTSup, 6; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press). The Fate of King Saul (JSOTSup, 14; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press). The Story of King Saul in Images of Man and God (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press).

Haiot, H.P. Psalms: Commentary (in Hebrew) (Zitomir: Kahna). 1902 Hammershaimb, E. The Book of Amos (Oxford: Basil Blackwell). 1970 Haran, M. Ages and Institutions in the Bible (in Hebrew) (Tel Aviv: Am Oved). 1972 Harper, W. Amos and Hosea (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark). 1905

286 Harris, S.L. 1981 Harrison, R.K. 1980 Harviainen, T. 1984

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets '1 Samuel VIII7-8', VT31: 79-80. Leviticus (TOTC; Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press). 'Hushai the Arckite, a Gentile in the King's Court 2 Sam. 16:17', StudOr 55.12:267-75.

Hertzberg, H.W. 1, 2 Samuel (OTL; London: SCM Press). 1964 Hesse, F. 'Amos 5, 4-6, 14. f.', TAW 68: 1-17. 1956 Hizkuni Mizkia Ben-Manoah, Commentary to the Tora (Masad Hazar Kook, 1984 Jerusalem). Hoffmann, D. The Book of Leviticus (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Mossad Marav Kook). 1959 Horvits, A.E., E. Tov and S. Yefet (eds.) Studies in Biblical Literature (Jerusalem: Magnes Press). 1992 Huizinga, J. Scornful Man (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Am Oved). 1966 Humphreys, W. I 'Rise and Fall of King Saul', JSOT1Z: 74-90. 1980 Hurvitz, A. ' "Diachronic Chiasm" in Biblical Hebrew' (in Hebrew), in B. Uffen1971 heimer (ed.), Bible and Jewish History Dedicated to the Memory of Jacob Liver (Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University). Ibn Janah, Y. 1964 Sefer Harikmah (in Hebrew) (Translated into Hebrew by Yehuda Ibn Tibbon; Jerusalem: Hanezah). Ibn Kaspi, Y. 1911 Adoni Hakesef (in Hebrew) (A Commentary on the Former and the Latter Prophets) (London: Groditzki). Ishida, T. 1987 'Adonijah the Son of Haggith and his Supporters', in R. Friedman and H. Williamson (eds.), The Future of Biblical Studies (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press): 165-87. Jacob, B. 1929 Auge urn Auge (Berlin: Schocken Books). Japhet, S. 1967 'The Interchange of Verbal Radicals in Parallel Texts in the Book of Chronicles' ,LeS 31: 165-79. 1977 The Ideology of the Book of Chronicles and its Place in Biblical Thought (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute). Jebb, J. Sacred Literature (London: Forster). 1820 Jenkins, A.K. 'Hezekiah's 14th Year', VT26: 284-98. 1976

Bibliography Jones, G.H. 1984 Kara, J. 1972 Kaufmann, E. 1962 1963a

287

Kings, II (NCB; London: SCM Press). Commentary on the Former Prophets (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook).

The Book of Judges (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Kiriat Sepher). The History of the Religion of'Israel^ II (in Hebrew) (4 vols.; Tel-Aviv: Bialik Institute and Dvir). The Book ofJeshua (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Kiriat Sepher, 2nd edn). 1963b From the Mystery of the Creation of the Bible (in Hebrew) (Tel Aviv: 1966 Dvir). Keil, C.F., and F. Delitzsch The Books of Kings (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmens). 1965 1967 The Books of Samuel (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmens). Kessler, M. 'Inclusio in the Hebrew Bible', Semitics 6: 44-49. 1978 Klaus, N. 1984 The Sanctification of Samuel as a Prophet' (in Hebrew), Bet Miqra 99: 305-25. 'Between Job and his Friends' (in Hebrew), Bet Miqra 105: 152-68. 1986a 'The Benediction of Peace in the Bible' (in Hebrew), Bet Miqra 106: 1986b 252-67. Klostermann, A. Die Bucher Samuelis und der Konige (KHAT; Nordlingen: Beck'sche 1887 Buchandlung). Koch, K. 1964 Was ist Formgeschichte? (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Verlag des Erziehungsveriens). Kogut, S. 1987 'On the Syntactical Significance and Status of the Word "Behold" in Biblical Hebrew' (in Hebrew), in M. Ben-Asher (ed.), Studies in Language (Jerusalem: The Hebrew University): II-HI, 245-58. Krasovec, J. 1977 Der Merismus im Biblisch-Hebrdischen und Nordwestsemitischen (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute). Kraus, H.J. 1988 Psalms 1-54 (Minneapolis: Augsburg). Kravitz, G. 1971 'Decree and Implementation in the Pentateuch and in Ugarit' (MA thesis; Jerusalem: The Hebrew University). Kugel, J. 1981a 'On the Bible and the Literary Criticism', Prooftext 1: 217-36. 1981b The Idea of Biblical Poetry, Paralellism and its History (New Haven: Yale University Press). 1982 'Responds to A. Berlin', Prooftexts 2: 228-32 Kuhl, C. 1952 'Die Wiederaufnahme: ein literarkritisches Prinzip', ZAW64: 1-11.

288

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Labuschagne, C.J. 1973 The Particles and , OTS 18: 17-23. Langlamet, F. 1976 'La redaction prosolomonienne de 1 Rois 1-11 pour ou contre Salomon?', RB 83:481-528. 1978 'Ahitofel et Houshai redaction prosolomonienne en 2 Sam. 15-17', in Y. Avishur and J. Blau (eds.), Studies in Bible and the Ancient Near East: Presented to S.E. Loewenstamm (Jerusalem: Rubinstein): 57-90. Laato, A. 1990 The Composition of Isaiah 40-55', JBL 109: 207-28. Leibovich, N. 1983 New Reflections on the Book of Leviticus (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: The Department of Education in the Diaspora, Jewish Agency). Lemche, N.P. 1978 •David's Rise', JSOT10: 2-25. Licht, J.S. 1971 'Fast' (in Hebrew), Biblical Encyclopedia: VI, 692-95. 1978 Storytelling in the Bible (Jerusalem: Magnes Press). Lieberman, S. 1991 Greek and Hellenism in Jewish Palestine (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute and Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi, 3rd edn). Liver, J. 1964 Lectures on the Book of Samuel (in Hebrew) (Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University). 1968a 'Menahem' (in Hebrew), Biblical Encyclopedia: V, 30-33. 1968b 'Nagid' (in Hebrew), Biblical Encyclopedia: V, 753-55.

Loewenstamm, S.E. 'On the System of the Chiastic Pattern in the Bible' (in Hebrew), in 1955 1962 1963 1976 Long, B.O. 1981 1984 1985 1986 Lowth, R. 1753 Lund, N.W. 1930

A. Biram (ed.), The Auerbach Book (Jerusalem: Kiriat Sepher): 27-30. 'The Seven Day Unit in the Ugaritic Epic' (in Hebrew), Tarbiz 31: 22735. 'Measure for Measure' (in Hebrew), Biblical Encyclopedia: IV, 840-46. 'The Vow' (in Hebrew), Biblical Encyclopedia: VII, 479-91. 'Wounded Beginnings: David and Two Sons', in B. Long (ed.), Images of Man and God (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press): 35-59. / Kings with an Introduction to Historical Literature (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans). 'Historical Narrative and the Fictionalizing Imagination', VT 35: 405-17. Framing Repetitions in Biblical Historiography (9th World Congress of Judaic Studies; Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies): 69-76. Lectures on the Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews (Oxford: Oxford University Press). 'The Presence of Chiasmus in the Old Testament', AJSL 46: 104-126.

Bibliography 289 Malamat, A. 1991 Malbim 1961 Mazar, B. 1974

289

Man and Israel: Two West-Semitic Cultures (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Magnes Press). The Matter of Samuel and the Matter of the Kings (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Horev).

'The Historical Background to the Book of Genesis in Canaan and Israel' (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute): 131-43. McCarter, P.K., Jr 1 Samuel (AB; New York: Doubleday). 1980 2 Samuel (AB; New York: Doubleday). 1984 McCarthy, D.J. 'The uses ofnm in Biblical Hebrew', Bib61: 330-42. 1980 Melamed, E.Z. 'Phrases in Scripture Specific to the Lord' (in Hebrew), Tarbiz 19: 1-18. 1948 'Idiomatic Phrases Detailed in Biblical Poetry' (in Hebrew), in J. Grinz 1964 and J. Liver (eds.), The Segal Book (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Kiriat Sepher): 188-219. Bible Commentators (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 2nd edn). 1978 Mendelsohn, J. 'On the Preferential Status of the Eldest Son', BASOR 156: 38-40. 1959 Milgrom, J. Leviticus 1-16 (AB; New York: Doubleday). 1991 Miller, C.L. 'Discourse Functions of Quotative Frames in Biblical Hebrew Narrative' 1995 in W.R. Bodine (ed.), Discourse Analysis of Biblical Literature (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press): 155-82. Miller, P.D., Jr 5m and Judgement in the Prophets: A Stylistic and Theological Analysis 1982 (SBLMS, 27; Chico: Scholars Press). Mirsky, A. 'Stylistic Device for Conclusion in Hebrew', Semitics 5: 9-23. 1977 The Phrasing of Hebrew Style (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Mossad Harav 1978 Kook). 'Prophecy in the Form of Judgement' (in Hebrew), in S. Loewenstamm 1987 (ed.), Studies in Bible: Dedicated to the Memory of U. Cassuto, on the 100th Anniversary of his Birth (Jerusalem: Magnes Press): 180-83. Miscall, P.O. 1 Samuel: A Literary Reading (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University 1986 Press). Montgomery, J. \., and H.S. Gehman The Books of Kings (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 2nd edn). 1967 Moore, G.F. The Book of Judges (New York: Dodd, Mead, 2nd edn). 1958 Naor, M. 1954 HaMiqra WeHa'Aretz, the Bible and the Land (in Hebrew) (Tel Aviv: Histadrut Hamorim).

290

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Neubauer, K.W 1966 Noth, M. 1964 1965 Ogushi, M. 1978 Orlinsky, H.M. 1946 Parunak, H.V.D 1981 Paul, S.M. 1991 Pederson, J. 1940 Pesch,R. 1966 Poethig, E.B. 1989 Polak, F. 1983

1994 Porten, B. 1967 Porter, J.R. 1954 1976 Poulssen, N. 1978 Pritchard, J.B. 1969

1972 Rad, G. von 1956 Radday, Y.T. 1964 1971 1973

'Erwagungen zu Amos 5,4-15', ZAW1S: 292-316. Konige 1 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag). Leviticus (OTB; London: SCM Press). Der Tedel im Alte Testament (Frankfurt: Peter Lang). 'Harokdim for Harekim, in 2 Samuel 6, 20', JBL 65: 25-35. 'Oral Typesetting: Some Uses of Biblical Structure', Bib 62: 153-68. A Commentary on the Book of Amos (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress Press). Israel: Its Life and Culture (London: Oxford University Press). 'Zur konzentrischen Struktur von Jona 1', Bib 47: 577-81. The Victory Song of the Women of Israel (UMI; Ann Arbor, MI: Ann Arbor University Press). The Joab Episodes: Joab's Image in the David Narrative', in Y. Zakovitch and A. Rofe (eds.), I.L. Seeligmann Festschrift (2 vols.; Jerusalem: Rubinstein), I: 213-28. Biblical Narrative: Aspects of Art and Design (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute). 'Structure and Theme of Solomon Narrative', Hebrew Union College Annual 38: 93-128. '2 Samuel 6 and Psalm 132', JTS 5: 161-73 Leviticus (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). 'De Mikalscene, 2 Sam 16, 20-23', Bijragen Tijdschrift voor Filosofie en Theologie 39: 32-58. The Ancient Near East in Pictures (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2nd edn). Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 4th edn). Studies in Deuteronomy (London: SCM Press, 2nd edn). 'Chiasmus in Hebrew Biblical Narrative' (in Hebrew), Bet Miqra 20-21: 48-72. 'Chiasm in Samuel', LB 9-10: 21-31 'Chiasm in Joshua, Judges and Others', LB 27-28: 6-13.

Bibliography 1974 1979 1981 Rehm, M. 1979 1982 Reviv, H. 1974

1983 Richter, W. 1965 Ridout, G.P. 1971 Rofe, A. 1982 1986

1994 Rogers, J.S. 1988 Rosel, H.N. 1990 Rost, L. 1926 Sacon, K.K. 1982

Savran, G.W. 1988

291

'Chiasm in Kings', LB 31: 52-67. 'Exodus Ch. 2' (in Hebrew), in J. Hocherman, M. Lahav and Z. Zmarion (eds.), Yaacov Gil Jubilee Volume (Jerusalem: Mass R.): 241-45. 'Chiasmus in Hebrew Biblical Narrative', in J.W. Welch (ed.), Chiasmus in Antiquity (Hildesheim: Gerstenberg Verlag): 50-117. Das erste Buck der Konige (Wiirzberg: Echter Verlag). Das zweite Buck der Konige (Wurzberg: Echter Verlag). From Patriarchal Family to Kingdom (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Magnes Press). The Elders in Ancient Israel (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Magnes Press). 'Die "Nagid" Formel', BZ9: 71-84. Prose Compositional Techniques in the Succession Narrative (Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms). The Prophetical Stories (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Magnes Press). 'The Battle of David and Goliath: Folklore, Theology, Eschatology' (in Hebrew), in J. Blidstein, E. Yasif and B. Salmon (eds.), Eshel Be'erSheva (Be'er Sheva: Be'er Sheva University Press): 55-89. 'Elisha in Dotan (2 Kings 6.8-23): Historico-Literary Criticism Aided by the Midrash' (in Hebrew), BetMiqra 140: 3-12. 'Narrative Stock and Deuteronomistic Elaboration in 1 Kings 2', CBQ 50: 398-413. The Book of Amos (in Hebrew) (Haifa: Ach). Die Oberlieferung von der Thronnachfolge Davids (BWANT, 42; Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer). 'A Study of the Literary Structure of "The Succession Narrative'", in Studies in the Period of David and Solomon and Other Essays (International Symposium for Biblical Studies Tokyo, 1979; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns). Telling and Retelling: Quotation in Biblical Narrative (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press).

Schroer, S. In Israel gab es Bilder (Freiburg: UniversitSts Verlag). 1987 Seeligmann, I.L. 'Research Studies in the History of Biblical Textual Versions' (in 1956 Hebrew), Tarbiz 25: 118-39. 'Hebrew Prose and Biblical Historiography' (in Hebrew), in Horvits, Tov 1992a and Yefet (eds.) 1992: 46-61.

292

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets 1992b

1992c

Segal, M.H. 1964 Semah, S. 1954 Shiloah, M. 1964 Simon, U. 1969

1976

1980

1981 1992

Skehan, P.W. 1976 Smith, H.P. 1899 Staudt, E. 1980 Sternberg, M. 1977 1979 1982

Stock, A. 1984 Strauss, A.L. 1954 Tadmor, H. 1972

'Human Heroism and Divine Salvation: The Dual Causality in the Historical Thinking of the Bible' (in Hebrew), in Horvits, Tov and Yefet (eds.) 1992: 62-81. 'Understanding Prophecy in Deuteronomic and Chronological History' (in Hebrew) (with an Appendix on the Book of Jeremiah), in Horvits, Tov and Yefet (eds.) 1992: 205-28. The Books of Samuel (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Kiriat Sepher, 2nd edn). Content and Form, Man with Others (Tel Aviv: Am Oved): 250-71 'And he said ... and he said' (in Hebrew), in A Weiser and B.Z. Luria (eds.), Korngrin Book (Tel Aviv: Niv): 251-67. 'Secondary Characters in the Biblical Narrative' (in Hebrew), in P. Peli (ed.), Fifth World Congress of Jewish Studies (Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies): 31-36. '1 Kings 13: A Prophetic Sign—Denial and Persistence' (in Hebrew), in E. Hamenachem (ed.), Reflections on the Bible (5 vols.; Tel Aviv: Don): II, 171-85. 'Elijah's War on Baal-Worship: The Unity and Structure of the Story (1 Kings, 17-18)' (in Hebrew), in U. Simon and M. Goshen-Gottstein (eds.), Studies in Bible and Exegesis (Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University): 51-118. 'Samuel's Call to Prophecy', Prooftexts 1: 119-32. Jonah, Introduction and Commentary (in Hebrew) (Mikra Le'Israel; Tel Aviv: Am Oved; Jerusalem: Magnes Press). Turning or Burning? 1 Sam. 17: 53 LXX', CBQ 38: 193-95. The Book of Samuel (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark). Prayer and the People in the Deuteronomist (Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms International). 'The Structure of Repetition in Biblical Narrative: Strategies of Informational Redundancy' (in Hebrew), Hasifrut 25: 109-150. 'Between the Truth and the Whole Truth in Biblical Narrative' (in Hebrew), Hasifrut 29: 110-46. 'Language, a World and a Perspective in the Art of Scripture' (in Hebrew), Hasifrut 32: 88-131. 'Chiastic Awareness and Education in Antiquity', BTB 14: 23-27. 'Psalm 12' (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: The Department of Education in the Diaspora, Jewish Agency): 5-12. 'Pul' (in Hebrew), Biblical Encyclopedia: VI, 443.

Bibliography 293 Talmon, S. 1955 1960 1977 1978

Talshir, Z. 1982 Trebolle, J. 1979 Tur-Sinai, N.H. 1965 Uffenheimer, B. 1973 Ulrich, B.C. 1979

293

'A Case of Faulty Harmonization', VT5: 206-208. 'Double Readings in the Massoretic Text', Textus 1: 144-84. The Textual Study of the Bible: A New Outlook' (in Hebrew), Shnaton 2:116-63. 'The Presentation of Synchroneity and Simultaneity in Biblical Narrative', Scripta Hierosolymitana 27: 9-26. 'Narrative Ties in Early Biblical Historiography' (in Hebrew), Shnaton 5-6: 69-78. 'Espias contra consejeros en la revuelta de Abshalom', RB 86: 524-43. The Bible: Its Literal Meaning (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute). Ancient Prophecy in Israel (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Magnes Press). The Qumran Text of Samuel and Josephus (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press).

VanderKam, J.C 1980 'Davidic Complicity in the Death of Abner and Eshbaal', JBL 99: 521-39. Vater, A.M. 1980 'Narrative Patterns for the Story of Commissioned Communication in the Old Testament', JBL 99: 365-82. Venham, G.J. 1988 The Book of Leviticus (Ann Arbor, MI: Ann Arbor University Press, 2nd edn). Watson, W.G.E. 1976 'Pivot Pattern', ZAW 88: 239-53. 1981 'Chiastic Patterns in Biblical Hebrew Poetry', in J.W. Welch (ed.), Chiasmus in Antiquity (Hildesheim: Gerstenberg Verlag): 118-68. 1984 Classical Hebrew Poetry (JSOTSup, 26; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press). Weinfeld, M. 1972 Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School (Oxford: Clarendon Press). Justice and Righteousness in Israel and the Nations (in Hebrew) (Jeru1985 salem: Magnes Press). 1992 From Joshua to Josiah (Jerusalem: Magnes Press). Weiss^ M. 1962 The Bible and Modem Literary Theory (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute). Scriptures in their Own Light: Collective Essays (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: 1987 Bialik Institute). The Book of Amos: Commentary (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Magnes Press). 1992 Weiss, R. Studies in the Text and Language of the Bible (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: 1981 Magnes Press).

294

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Weissbach, F.H. Keilinschriften der Achaemeniden (repr.; Jerusalem: Gewil Press). 1911 Welch, J.W. (ed, ) 1981 Chiasmus in Antiquity (Hildesheim: Gertstenberg Verlag). Whitelam, K.W. 1979 The Just King: Monarchial Judicial Authority in Ancient Israel (JSOTSup, 12; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press). Wicke, D.N. 1986 The Structure of 1 Sam 3: Another View', BZ 30: 256-58. Williamson, H.CKM. 1977 Israel in the Book of Chronicles (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). 1-2 Chronicles: Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans). 1982 Wolff, H.W. 1966 The Kerygma of the Yahwist', Interpretation 20: 144. WUrthwein, E. 1974 Die Erzdhlung von der Thronfolge Davids: Theologische oder politische Geschichtsschreibung (Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 115; Zurich: Theologischer Verlag). Yaron, R. 'A Ramessid Parallel to 1 Kings 2: 44-45', VT8: 432-33. 1958 Yazon, H. The Story of David and Goliath: An Epic Folk Creation?' (in Hebrew), 1976 Hasifrut 23: 23-41. Yeivin, Sch. 'Reuben' (in Hebrew), Biblical Encyclopedia: VII, 287-94. 1976 Yellin, D. 1983 Studies in the Bible (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook, 3rd edn). Zakovitch, Y. 'Double Midrashic Name Derivation' (in Hebrew) (MA Thesis; Jeru1971 salem: Hebrew University). 'For the Three ... and for Four' (in Hebrew) (Dissertation; Jerusalem: 1979 Hebrew University). 'From Oral to Written Narrative in the Bible' (in Hebrew), in G. Hazan1981 Rokem (ed.), Research Papers in Jewish Folklore (Jerusalem: Magnes Press): 9-43. 1982a 'On the Situation of Research: A Survey of Biblical Literary Research in Israel' (in Hebrew), in D. Asaf (ed.), Jewish Studies (Jerusalem: Forum of The World Union of Jewish Studies 20): 17-29. The Life of Samson (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Magnes Press). 1982b Every High Official Has a Higher One Set over Him: A Literary Analysis 1985 of 2 Kings 5 (in Hebrew) (Tel Aviv: Am Oved). Ruth, Introduction and Commentary (in Hebrew) (Mikra Le'Israel; Jeru1990 salem: Magnes; Tel Aviv: Am Oved). Zakovitch, Y., ai id A. Shinan 1984 The Story of Reuben and Bilha (Genesis 35: 21-26) in the Bible, the Old Versions and the Ancient Jewish Literature (in Hebrew) (Research

Bibliography 295

295

Projects of the Jewish Studies Monograph Series, 3; Jerusalem: The Hebrew University). Zalevski, S. 1981 Zeidel, M. 1978 Zevit, Z. 1990

Solomon's Ascension to the Throne (Jerusalem: Markus). Biblical Research (Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook). 'Roman Jakobson Psycholinguistics and Biblical Poetry', JBL 109: 385401.

INDEXES INDEX OF REFERENCES OLD TESTAMENT

Genesis 1.3 1.9 2.8 2.16-17 2.16 3.2-3 3.3 4.11 6.8 6.18 7.7

9.6 9.25 11.1-9 11.3 12.1 12.3 12.8 12.16 12.18 14.17 14.22 15.18 16.4-5 16.4 16.5-6 16a.5 18.2 19.9 19.20 19.33 19.35 20.9 21.1-21

29, 39, 60 39 59 55 85 55 85 42 29 29 29 15, 223 156 235 112 59, 60 87 230 16 145 153 204 134 29 166 143 214 127 147 71 212 212 145 111

21.20 21.26 22.2 22.17 23.17 23.19 24.2 24.16 24.33-34 24.39 25.34 26.9 26.10 26.32 27.8 27.9 27.14 27.27 27.34 27.36 27.43 28.17-19 29.25 29.35 30.6 30.9 31.7 31.19 31.22-23 31.23 31.26-27 31.26 31.27 31.28-30 31.28-29

211 76, 77 60 133, 206 59 59 112 211 199 29 112 116 145 169 80 39 39 241 112 71 60, 80 230 146 115 153 115 127, 128 121 264 104 146 146 146 146 146

31.30 31.33 31.34 31.36 34.2 35.21-26 35.22 35.23 37 37.8 37.11 37.14 37.36-39.1 37.36 38 39.1 39.7 40.19 41.24 41.37 41.46 41.49 42.8 42.11 42.13 43.3 43.16-34 43.31 44.4-6 44.8 44.17-18 45.16 46.8 46.9

121, 146, 156 121 120 104, 264 183 240 239 238 238 266 183 182 46 62, 238 46, 238 238 114 171 266 129 67 133 227 169 169 81 135 113 199 116 194 129 238 238

Index of References 47.1 48 48.2 48.5 49.2 49.4 50.15

169 239 169 239 238 239 99

Exodus 1.22 2.1-4

2.5-10 2.6

2.11-12 2.13-14 2.14-15 2.15-18 2.18-20 2.21-22 4.7 4.14 5.4-5 6.12 6.14 6.30 12.50 14.11

14.23-24 15.1

15.9-10 15.20-21 16.8 16.12 16.14 16.34 17.3 17.7 18.7 18.11 18.19 19.10 19.14 20.1

20.2-3 20.4 20.7 20.12

62 18 18 111 18 18 123, 125, 127, 274 18 18 18 69 153 143 116 238 116 220 145 268 67, 268 103, 208 153 61 61 206 220 147 15 153 73 204 69, 264 69, 264 29 83 121 221 49

20.13-14 21.12 21.14 21.19 21.23-24 21.28-36 22.27 23.17 23.31 33.14-15 34.17 34.23 34.28 Leviticus 6.16 8.1 8.4 8.36 11.24-28 14.5-7 14.8-9 14.16 16.34 17.1 19 19.4 19.10 24.10-23 24.10-16 24.10-13 24.10-12 24.10 24.13-23 24.13-14 24.13 24.14

24.15 24.16-22 24.16 24.17 24.18 24.19

56 222 42 224 225 223 221 235 135 207 121 235 272

297

24.22 24.23 25.18-19 25.29 26.5

219, 224, 226 219, 222, 224, 226 219, 222 219, 222 133 62 133

Numbers 1.20 5.19-20 5.21-22 6.4 10.24 10.35 11.9 11.16 12.13 15.35-36 16 16.9 17.11-12 20.5 20.29 21.23 22 22.13-14 22.21-35 23.6 23.11 23.16-17 23.17 23.24 24 24.9 24.11-12 24.14 24.21 26.5-7 26.5 27.17 30.3

238 218 218 165 129 159 206 100 72 16 176 212 39 147 77 153 55 48 14 77 145 52, 138, 263 77 202 148 212 71 204 232 238 238 90 92

24.20

24.21

15 220 220 220 185, 218, 226 69 68 70, 265 220 220 221 121 221 222 222 219 219 222 218, 219 219 219 219, 221, 222 219 218 219, 221, 222 219, 222, 224 219, 223, Deuteronomy 1.7 224 135 44, 219, 224 1.30 129

298 3.18 3.24 4.19 4.28 4.29 4.35 6.7 8.19

10.8 10.17 11.19

12.5 12.7 12.10 13.7 17.7 17.18 19.21 21.15-17 21.17 22.5 26.5 27.15 28.6 28.10 28.25 28.26 28.64 31.29 32.1 33.5 33.6 33.9 34.8

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets 201 189

8.2 8.14

187

8.19

191

8.24

227

10.10

190

191

10.15 10.21 11 11.4 11.7 14.11 18.12 22.19 22.30 22.32 23.1 24.4 24.11 24.14 24.16 24.20 24.31 24.32

149 270

Judges

212 187 212 235 212 229 133 133 213 221 86 225 239, 240 239, 240 109

100

190 56 191 191

14 238 241 130 77

Joshua

1.16-18 1.16

1.17 1.18

2.19 3.13 3.16 4.7 4.21 5.1 7.2 7.19

37 37 37 37 43 269 212, 269 269 269 269

230 77

183 153 104, 263 104 104, 263 104, 263 104, 263 35 206, 268 206 149 230 66

129 129 114 15 83 134 83 83

8.35 9 9.1-5 9.1

9.4

157, 158

9.5 9.6 9.7-20 9.16

100 99 98 99 98

9.20 9.21 9.23-24 9.23 9.24 9.25 9.50-54 9.54 9.55 9.56-57

66

134

6.19 6.39

6.40 7 7.5 7.7 7.10 7.13-14 7.15-18 7.17-18 7.17

7.19-20 7.19 8.2 8.30

100 83 83 120 268 19, 38 120 206 206 74 59 98 268 74 74 247 74, 94-96, 247, 248, 253, 256 74 75 72 100

123 98, 101 99, 100 100 99 99 102, 103 98

52, 98, 100, 101, 141,

9.56

1.7 2.12 2.13 2.17 4.15 6-8

99, 129 98 99 98

9.57 10.14 11.3

11.4 11.10

11.25 11.34 13.10 13.20 14.2 14.12 14.18 15.11 16.17 16.18 16.23-24

17 17.2 17.4 17.5 18.6 18.11-21 18.11

246, 249, 251, 256, 262, 270 98-100, 142, 249 43, 98, 99 206

123, 157 114 123 156

153 169

62 169 169

202 146, 225 169

127 109 83 121 121 121 121 248 118

Index of References 299 18.14 18.15 18.16-17

18.16 18.17

18.18 18.20 18.30-31 19.21 20.31 20.43 23-24

121 118, 119 117, 124, 141, 248, 251, 256, 273, 275 31, 117, 118, 142 117, 118, 120, 121, 275 118, 121 118

121 129 120 120 100

Ruth 1.5 2.1 2.8-9 2.12 2.19 3.3 3.13 3.14 3.16 4.1

15 138 76 47 169 112 129 130 169 169

1 Samuel 1.8 2.3 2.8 2.13 2.27-36 2.27 2.28 2.30 3 3.9-10 3.9 3.10 3.11-14 3.11 3.12 3.14

72 235 166 81 75 156 121 164, 266 106 39 76 76 75 76 76 78

3.15 3.16-18 3.16-17 3.17

3.18 4.4 4.6-7 4.10 4.11-17 4.16 5.2 6 6.7-11 6.20 7.11 7.15-17 8.5-6 8.5 8.6 8.7-19 8.7-9

8.7 8.8 8.9 8.11-18 8.19 8.22 9.1 9.7 9.12-13 10.12 10.18-19 10.24 10.25 11.1-11 11.1-2 11.1 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6-7 11.7-8 11.7

76, 78 75 76 73, 75, 9496, 185, 250, 253, 258 76-78 189 159 141 141 76, 77 103 249 39 249 104, 105 229 79 81 80 95 79, 94-96, 191, 247, 250, 256 79, 80, 82 79,81,82, 129 79-81 79, 81 79 79 138 173 76 108 82 88 81 20 20 269 20 20 20 20 20 20

299 11.9 11.10 11.11 12.1 12.6-12 12.6 12.10 13.5 14.3 14.13 14.23 14.50 14.52 15 15.1 15.23 15.25 16.15-16 16.17 16.21 16.22 17 17.2 17.4 17.5-7 17.9 17.11 17.12-13 17.17 17.34 17.36-37 17.36 17.37 17.41-53 17.45 17.48-50 17.48-49 17.48 17.49 17.50 17.51-54

17.51 17.52-53

20 20 20, 21 79, 80 82 82 83 230 121 103 230 44 201 79 80 99 191 210 211 67, 91, 108, 212 212 106 105 105 102 103, 105, 203 204 204 268 202, 267 20 202, 267 202 102 106 101 102 102 102 102 101, 102, 108, 141, 251, 254, 258, 274 101-103 106, 263

300 17.52

17.53 17.54 17.55 17.57 18 18.5 18.6-7 18.6 18.7 18.13 18.16 18.17 18.19 18.23 19.11 19.17 20.2 20.6 20.27 20.28-29 20.28 21.10 21.15 22.17 22.18 22.39-40 23.4 23.7 23.13 23.14-18 23.14-15

23.14 23.15-18 23.15 23.16-18 23.16 23.17 23.18

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets 23.25 101, 104, 24.5-7 105, 142, 248, 249, 24.5 274 24.12 31, 101, 104, 25.1 105 25.25 101-103 25.28 103 25.31 101 25.39 127 26.2 26.3-4 129 26.10 153 162 26.11 162, 203 26.17 149 26.18-19 149 26.25 27.1-5 203 160 28.9 164 28.20-22 154 28.22 29 158 173 29.6 156 30.12 135 30.16 76 30.26 156 31.1 31.6-9 103 31.6 145 31.7 42 42 31.8-13 102 31.8-10 128 31.8 127 31.9-10 122, 123, 126 123 73, 122, 127, 31.9 141,251, 256, 273, 31.10 274 122-24 31.11-13 122 31.11 122-24, 126, 31.12 142 31.13 124 37.17 124 127 2 Samuel 1.2 125

123, 125 45 213 127 48 181 213 43 99 126 127 109 45 211 181, 267 98 123 145 79 80 127 149 272 133 110 105 126 107, 108 107, 108 107 247 107-109 107, 108, 141, 247, 251, 256, 275 107, 142, 248, 269 103, 107, 109 107 269 107 107 76

268

1.5 1.6 1.13 1.15 1.16 1.20 2.22 2.23 3 3.1 3.6 3.7 3.8-10 3.12-39 3.13 3.19 3.20

3.21-23 3.21

3.22 3.23 3.24-25

3.24 3.25

3.26-27

3.26

3.27 3.28-29 3.28 3.29 3.30 3.32-33 3.32 3.33

170 170 170 42 42,43, 103 110 172 129 41 168 44, 149 215 147 144, 150 36 129 144, 145, 205 144, 152 144, 145, 147-49 145, 147, 149, 151 144, 147, 149, 151 56, 144, 145 147, 173, 175, 176, 246, 248, 258 144-47, 14951, 173, 176 144, 146, 148, 149, 151 144, 151, 152 44, 50, 129, 144, 145, 149, 151 129, 148 45, 129 43, 47 43 129 129 149 129

Index of References 3.35 3.36-37 3.36

3.37 3.38 3.39 4.10 4.12 5.1-2 5.2 6.2 6.4 6.5 6.11 6.12 6.14 6.15 6.16 6.17 6.18 6.19 6.20-22

6.20

6.21

6.22 6.23 7.1 7.8 7.17 7.19 7.22-24 7.28

112, 129, 130 128 106, 128, 141, 142, 249, 251, 256,271, 275 45, 129, 130 50, 128, 130 44, 50 170 42 90 149, 161 189 159 157, 159, 162, 163 160 160 159, 162 154 153, 155, 159, 162 159 153, 160 160 152, 175, 176, 246, 258, 275 153-55, 160, 165, 166, 261, 266, 275 154, 157-59, 161-63, 167, 253 163, 176, 266, 275 153, 154, 160, 167 160 161 82 206 189 190

9.2 9.9 10.8 10.16 10.19 11.2 11.4 11.5 11.8 11.11 11.14-25 11.22 11.27 12.3 12.5 12.6-20 12.13 12.14 12.16-23 12.16-20

12.16-17 12.16 12.17 12.18-19 12.18

12.19 12.20 12.21-23 12.21 12.22-23 12.22 12.23 13.1 13.5 13.6 13.10 13.12 13.14 13.20 13.27-36 13.27 13.28-38

131 160 119 134 115,270 113 213 169 113 112 19 169 111 112,213 213 252 112 111 247 110, 140, 141, 247, 258, 259 111 112, 113 112 270 111, 113-16, 142, 248, 249, 259 31, 111, 114, 115, 259 111-13, 117 111 116 111, 112, 117 116, 117 113, 116 114 112, 205 112 112 183 183 181, 184 180 182 178

301 13.29 13.30-31 13.30

13.31 13.32-33

13.32 13.33 13.34 13.35 13.36-39 13.36 13.37-38 13.37 14 14.9 14.18 14.21 15.12 15.13 15.31 15.34 15.37 16.5 16.7-8 16.7 16.8 16.15-16 16.16-19 16.16 16.19 16.21-23 16.21-22 16.21 16.22 16.23 16.34 17.1-3 17.1 17.2

90, 180 179 178, 179, 181, 183, 203 112, 179 178, 191, 216, 259, 260, 267, 272 179, 181, 182 180, 249 119 178 179 179 125 119 77, 139 211 77 180 194 170 196, 198 194, 198, 208 194, 196 163 33, 36 36 36, 43 194, 208 194 88, 196 200 198 194 200 215 194, 196, 197 194 194 200 200, 205, 206

302 17.3 17.4 17.5 17.6 17.7-14

17.7 17.8-13 17.8-10 17.8 17.9-10 17.9 17.10

17.11-13 17.11

17.12 17.13 17.14 17.15 17.23 18 18.5 18.6 18.7 18.8 18.9-14 18.9 18.10-14 18.10-11

18.10 18.11-14 18.11

18.12-13

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets 200, 205 18.14-15 194, 196, 18.14 198, 208 18.18 90 18.19-23 18.21 196 177, 194, 18.24-27 18.29 216, 249, 253, 257 18.32 195-98 19 196 19.6-8 195, 199 195, 198-202 19.8-9 267 19.10 195, 206, 19.20 19.27 209 195, 198, 19.30 20.4-5 200, 201, 205 21.4 195, 199 21.8-9 133, 195, 21.8 197, 198, 22.25 206, 207 23.9 195, 206, 24.10 209 24.13 195, 198 37.32-33 195-98 198 1 Kings 198 1.1-12.24 1 178 1.1-4 169, 173, 1.1 180 208 1.2 168, 210 208 171 1.4 90, 168, 171, 1.8 174 1.9 247 1.12-13 168, 175, 1.12 247, 257, 1.13 260, 265 1.16 168, 169, 1.17 175 168, 169 1.18 31, 147, 168, 1.19 1.20 170, 176, 1.22 249 168 1.23

169 168, 173 130 55 38 178 77, 114, 115 114, 115 139, 146 144, 146, 150, 152 39 171 181, 267 211 160 44 160 160 160 100 205 191 169 182

22 95 214 211-13 31,91,210, 216, 253, 258 211,212 89 87, 88, 92 84 85 92, 94 91 85, 86, 92, 94 89 87, 88 213 145 90

1.24-35

1.24-25 1.24

1.25 1.26 1.27 1.28-31 1.28 1.29-30 1.29 1.30 1.31 1.32-37 1.32-35 1.32 1.33 1.34 1.35

1.36-37 1.38-40 1.38-39 1.38 1.39

1.40 1.41-49 1.45 1.48 1.53 2.2 2.5-6 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.12 2.15 2.18 2.21

30, 33, 34, 83, 94, 95, 245, 249-51 257, 259, 265 248 83, 84, 86, 89, 92, 94, 265 84, 87, 90, 133, 264 84, 88 84, 89 93 84, 90, 212 83, 84 84 84, 86, 92, 189 84,91 93 83 84, 89, 90 84 84, 88 84, 86, 92, 161, 264, 265 39, 83, 89 39, 85, 93 90 89 88, 91, 94, 103 88 93 88 189 48, 88, 94 215 41,44 44 41,44 248 41 215 129 47

303

Index of References 2.22 2.23 2.24 2.25 2.26 2.28-35 2.29-31 2.29-30 2.29 2.30 2.31-34 2.31-33 2.31-32 2.31 2.32-33 2.32

2.33 2.34 2.35 2.37 2.38 2.42-46 2.42 2.44 2.45 2.46 3.6 3.13 4.7 4.17 4.19 4.20-5.5

4.20 5.1

5.2-3 5.2 5.3

47 47, 249 43, 47 42, 43 42, 43 40 41 41 41, 42, 48 42, 48 40, 41, 94, 95, 251, 259 41 46 40, 41, 4346, 48, 249 46, 270 31, 40, 4347, 99 40, 43, 45-47 40, 42, 48 41 43 213 45 43,45 45, 99 47 41 189 166 132 276 276 106, 132, 134, 141, 205, 251, 255, 256, 273, 276 132, 133, 267, 276 132-36, 266, 276 132, 135, 142 132, 136, 273 132

5.4-5 5.4 5.5

5.6-8 5.6 5.7-19 5.7 5.9-11 5.9 5.26 6.1-9 7.14 8 8.17 8.20 8.60 9 9.6 11.25 11.40 12.2 12.10 12.15 12.28-33 12.31 13 13.1 13.2-3 13.2 13.3 13.5 13.7 13.8-9

13.8 13.9 13.10 13.15-16 13.15 13.16-17

13.17 13.18

132 132, 134-36, 266, 276 132, 133, 267, 276 132 132 132 132 132 206 135 22 211 191 189 189 190 22 83 133 123 123 164, 266 47 52 82 94, 95, 263 53 52 53 53 53 51 50,51, 181, 250, 256, 263, 272 51-54 52-54, 56, 57 52, 57 48 59 50, 51, 53, 250, 256, 263, 272 53, 54, 56, 57 53, 55

13.19 13.22

13.23 13.24 13.30 13.32 14.7-8 15.18 15.19 16-17 16.5 16.11 16.27 17-2 Kgs 2 17 17.1 17.2-7

17.2 17.3 17.4 17.5-6 17.5

17.6 17.7 17.8 17.9 17.10 17.14 17.16 17.24 18 18.1-2 18.4 18.11-13 18.36 18.44-45 18.45 19.3

55, 57 50, 51, 5557, 249, 250, 256, 263, 272 55, 59 56 56 53 161 138, 186 138 181 137 86 137 38 58 62 53, 57, 58, 64, 73, 94, 95, 248, 250, 251, 258 57, 58, 94 58, 60-63, 269 57, 59, 61, 62 62 57-61, 94, 252 57-59, 61 57, 58, 6163, 269 58 60 60 58 58 58 58 60 62 71 66 69 58 127

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

304 19.10-12 19.11 19.13 19.15 19.19 20.4 20.25 20.38 20.42 21.7 21.13 21.18 22 22.10 22.20-22 22.53 25.24 2 Kings 1 1.3 1.13-14 2-4 3.24

3.27 5 5.2 5.3 5.7 5.8-15

5.8 5.9

5.10

5.11-13 5.11-12 5.11 5.12

5.13

62 60 60 60 60 211 169 67 147 85 220 60 181 119 149 137 89

148 66 185 229 104, 105, 263 104, 263 95, 217 70 65, 67, 70 65, 68 52, 62, 64, 94, 95, 248, 250, 251, 255, 256, 259, 263 65, 68, 70, 71 65, 71, 138, 268 65, 68-70, 72, 94, 264, 265 69 268 65-67, 70-72 65, 70-73, 193 65, 70, 227

5.14

5.15-19 5.15

5.16 5.17 5.18

5.20-27 5.26 6.11 6.18 7.2 7.3 7.7 7.10 7.17 8.23 9.6 9.10 9.17 9.20 9.34 10.4 10.7 11.12 12.19 13.2 14.5 14.24 15.9 15.11 15.16 15.17 15.18-21

15.18 15.19-20 15.19

65, 67, 69, 70, 94, 264, 265 248 64-67, 7072, 138, 191, 212, 247, 248, 268 72, 73, 186, 212 66, 185-87 106, 184, 216, 250, 254, 256, 257 188 85 38 70 187 119 268 268 187 137 189 42 178 178 42 116 179 88 138 137 68 137 136 136 139 136 106, 136, 141, 251, 256, 257, 263, 273 136, 137 67 136-40, 142

15.20

19.22-23 19.22 19.24 19.25 19.33 19.37 21.15 23.33 24.20

136, 138, 139 136 136 139 139 137, 140 138 138 67, 138 189 190 133, 189 267 190 190 192 192 67, 138 190 190 73, 106, 188, 216, 255, 257, 259 188, 191, 193, 257, 260 188, 192, 193 188, 192, 193, 249, 255, 257 188, 192 188-90, 193, 255, 257, 260 192 189, 192 192 192 138 186 82, 83 138 183

1 Chronicles 2.1

238

15.21 15.22 15.24 15.26 15.29 18.13-16 18.14-15 18.17 18.19-35 18.19 18.30 18.31 18.32-35 18.34 18.35 19.4 19.8 19.10-12 19.12 19.15-19

19.15

19.16 19.17

19.18 19.19

305

Index of References 2.3-4.23 2.13 4.24-43 5.1-3 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.26 10.9 10.10 10.12 15.2 15.26 15.29 22.9 26.30 26.32 27.23-24 29.10-19 29.11-12

238 238 238 218,237, 238 237 237, 239 237, 239 137 109 108, 275 108 240 162 162 133, 135 201 201 237 191 189

2 Chronicles 2.11 6.23 9.26 13.7 20.20 29.11 35.21

191 99 134 158 191 212 89

Ezra 3.5-6 21.26 33.4

236 121 203

Nehemiah 2.7 5.14 8.10 9.6 13.17-18

134 135 235 190 146

Esther 1.12 2.1-2 2.4 2.9

71,268 210 211 271

3.13 8.7

156 171

Job 1.13 1.16-18 1.16 1.18 1.19 4.17 6.21 7.4 9.30-31 16.18 16.19 19.9 26.2-3 29.8

133 145 180 133 180 131 270 212 265 42 171 108 155 212

Psalms 2 2.8 5.10 6.2 7.2 7.4 7.17 10.6 12.2-5 12.3-4 12.3 12.4-5 12.4 12.5 12.6-9 12.6 14.1 14.2 15 17.6 18.25 19.13-14 20.8 24.6 25.11 31.3 31.19 33.9

17 192 63 268 104 104 99 235 233 234 234 218, 233 233 233, 234 233 233, 237 234, 235 228 17 192 100 270 236 227 191 192 235 85, 265

37.8 41.9 42--43 44.17 46.7 51.14-15 67.2-8 71.2 72 73.8-9 73.11 74.10 76.13 78.67-68 79.9 80.4 80.8 80.20 86.10 101.8 102.11 104.8-10 104.26 105.20 107.33 114.7 115.4 115.15 118.25 119.172 121.2 121.8 124.8 133.3 135.15-18 135.15 136.3 139.1 143.11 145.13

268 212 192 192 234 270 218 192 133 235 234, 235 192 160 241 191 190 190 190 190 230 268 218 162 266 63 235 191 191 191 265 191 149 191 206 16 191 235 151 191 266

Proverbs 4.5-6 6.24 7.1 7.5 8.9 8.30

228 235 265 153 265 162

306

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

9.8 11.14 12.11 15.1 15.16-17 15.22 16.18 17.10 17.12 19.18 21.30 24.6 28.19

228 1% 158 268 72 196 72 202 202 228 209 196 158

Ecclesiastes 2.24 3.13 4.11 10.19

272 272 211 135

Song of Songs 2.17 60 Isaiah 1.21-26 1.24 3.1 3.5 5.11 8.5-8 8.23 9.12 10.18 10.22 10.28-32 11.7 14.5-6 14.13-15 17.12-14 20.6 22.15 23.9 23.17 28.11 31.1 31.8 36.16 37.4

255 235 235 164 104, 264 99 164, 266 228 14 133 229 202, 267 134, 266 87, 264 99 116 214 164, 266 190 236 67, 268 63 267 188, 192

37.10-13 37.16-20 37.16 37.17 37.18 40.3-52.11 40.17-20 41.26 41.29 43.17 44.9-19 44.15 46.10 47.3 48.20 49.5-6 49.6 51.17 51.22 52.8-9 53.6 55.6 56.3 56.5 61.9 63.3 63.16

189 188 188, 189 192 192 22 191 266 230 212 191 121 266 157 266 164, 266 164 165 165 218 164 228 59, 269 59, 269 130 268 130

Jeremiah 5.19 7.2 10.10-11 11.7 12.1 13.3-5 13.8 14.3 14.7 14.21 15.1 15.4 16.1 17.14 22.5 22.15 22.19 22.23 23.36

99 187 191 81 148 220 58 120 191 191 186 190 58 270 204 272 42 155 192

26.21 30.19 31.3 31.4 32.37 38.12 38.14 38.15 38.25 49.16

123, 127 153 270 162 71, 268 39 77 204 77 232

Lamentations 3.37 4.10 4.19 5.21

265 112 104 270

Ezekiel 2.5 8.17 24.10 26.7 33.4 33.33

64 164 107 67, 268 43 64

Daniel 7.8 9.18 10.5

235 192 169

Hosea 2.1 3.4 4.15 5.8 10.1 10.5 10.8 10.12 12.4-5 12.12 13.8

133, 192 121 230, 232 230 271 230 230 228 230 230 202

Amos

3.14 4.4 5.1-3 5.1

233 228, 229 227 227

307

Index of References 5.3 5.4-6 5.4 5.5 5.6

5.14-16 5.14 5.19 5.5 6.13 7.4 7.9-17

227 218, 227, 254 227 227, 230, 232 227, 228, 232 228 227 202, 267 229 229 269 232

7.11 7.17 8.14 9.1-4 Obadiah 3 Jonah 1.8 Micah 1.7 1.10-15 3.3 4.4

231 231 231 99

232

76

99 229 108 267

7.5

133 213

Habakkuk 3.12

192

Zephaniah 2.4

229

Zechariah 3.10 9.5 12.1 14.15 14.16-17

133 16, 218, 232 186 268 187

y. Suk. 5.4

157

Midrash Num. R. 4.20

162, 164

Tanh B. 23

240

4.5

RABBINIC UNIC WRITINGS

Mishnah Sanh. 2.4 20.2

20b 56a

Talmuds b. 'Arak. 16a

158 158 81 221

b. B. Bat. 123a

240

b. B. Qaml. 8a

225

b. Men. 75a

66

15

INDEX OF AUTHORS Abarbanel, I. 47, 67, 85, 86, 89, 90, 119, 124 Abramsky, S. 101, 154 Ahlstrom, G.W. 162 Alonso Schokel, L. 19, 23 Alter, R. 30, 88, 93, 113, 148, 155-58, 166, 167, 247, 250, 252 Amir, D. 63 Amit,Y. 78, 98, 121, 122, 242 Avishur, Y. 162, 261, 262 Bar-Efrat, S. 20, 23, 45, 85, 86, 91, 92, 99, 103, 155, 180, 183, 184, 19597, 199-205, 207-209, 252 Barrera, J.T. 123, 125, 127 Baumgartner 165 Ben David, A. 171, 172 Bendor, S. 100, 138 Bengel, J.A. 16, 26 Berlin, A. 20, 163, 171 Bertheau, E. 120 Bertholet, A. 224 Boogaart, T.A. 99 Bowman, K.G. 116, 179, 180, 183 Boys.T. 16 Breck,J. 26, 27 Brenner, A. 78, 157 Briggs, C.A. 14 Brin.G. 239-42 Brueggeman, W. 152, 156 Buber, M.M. 23, 58, 80-82, 227, 236 Budde, K. 120 Bullinger, E.W. 16 Burney, C.F. 53, 85, 88, 91, 118, 134, 192, 213, 214 Buttenweiser, M. 233

Caird, G.B. 76, 122 Carlson, R.A. 112, 114, 159, 163, 165, 166, 213 Cassuto, U. 28, 29, 225, 233, 238, 261, 262, 269, 270 Ceresko.A.R. 20 Chamiel.H. 82 Coats, G.W. 147 Cogan, M. 67, 137-39, 185, 186, 194 Cohn.R.L. 64, 66, 68, 184 Conroy.C. 196-201, 203, 206, 207 Corvin,J.W. 191 Cripps, R.S. 231 Criisemann, F. 159 Culley,R.C. 58 Dahood, M. 14, 16, 236 DeBoer, B.A. 164 DeVries, S.J. 237, 276 DeWaard,J. 227 Delitzsch, F. 65, 68, 89, 122, 162, 213 Di Marco, A. 14, 17, 22, 27 Dozeman, T.B. 50, 215 Driver, S.R. 14, 80, 109, 127, 159 Efal.I. 138 Ehrlich, A.B. 43, 59, 91, 118, 119, 127, 137, 139, 147, 156, 165, 173, 196, 202, 207, 210, 212 Eslinger, L. 75, 80, 83 Ewald, H. 183 Fenton, T.L. 214 Flanagan, J.W. 122 Fokkelman, J.P. 19, 20, 23, 41, 49, 76, 83, 88, 90, 101, 103, 107, 110, 111,

Index of Authors 116, 122-25, 127, 174, 196, 201, 210, 245 Forbes.J. 16 Freedman, D.N. 26 Frisch, A. 22, 42, 48, 86, 89, 90, 93 Fritz, V. 99 Galil.G. 219-23, 226 Garsiel, M. 59, 61, 62, 82, 192, 213, 229, 230, 232 Gehman, H.S. 185, 186 Gelender, S. 74, 95, 144, 148, 149, 152, 156, 160, 163, 233, 245, 246, 250 Geller, S.A. 14 Gerleman, G. 113 Gesenius, W.L. 82, 89, 155, 157, 165, 171, 173, 204, 240 Gluck, N. 59, 161 Goldberg, L. 27 Gooding, D.W. 19 Gordon, C.H. 202 Gray,J. 42, 185, 189, 214 Greenberg.M. 189, 191, 192 Gruber, M.I. 162, 163 Gunn, D.M. 146, 161 Hammershaimb, E. 227 Haran,M. 68 Harper, W. 227 Harris, S.L. 82 Harrison, R.K. 222 Harviainen, T. 207 Hertzberg, H.W. 113 Hesse, F. 227 Hoffmann, D. 223, 224 Huizinga, J. 157 Humphreys, W.L. 108 Hurvitz, A. 22

Keil, C.F. 65, 68, 89, 122, 162, 213 Kessler, M. 26 Klaus, N. 76, 148, 172, 176 Klostermann, A. 138 Koch, K. 58 Kogut, S. 171 Krasovec, J. 14 Kraus, H.J. 236 Kravitz, G. 40, 48, 52, 60, 69, 138, 199 Kugel.J. 14, 20, 22, 85 Kuhl,C. 237 Labuschagne, C.J. 145 Langlamet, F. 93, 208 Latto, A. 22 Leibovich, N. 226 Lemche.N.P. 128 LichU.S. 252 Lieberman, S. 157 Liver, J. 139, 161 Loewenstamm, S.E. 99, 114, 255 Long, B.O. 41, 45, 49, 57, 58, 119, 132, 134 Lowth, R. 14 Lund,N.W. 17, 19, 218, 227 Malamat, A. 135 Mazar.B. 242 McCarter, P.K. 45, 79, 81, 83, 102, 109, 131, 149, 154, 165, 173, 180, 181, 183, 204, 207 Melamed, E.Z. 15, 261 Mendelsohn, J. 240 Milgrom, J. 68 Miller, P.O. 99, 155 Mirsky, A. 45, 46, 107, 246 Miscall, P.D. 109, 128 Montgomery, J.A. 185, 186 Moore, G.F. 118, 119

Ishida,T. 214 Japhet, S. 239, 241 Jebb,J. 16 Jenkins, A.K. 192 Jones, G.H. 64, 65 Kaufmann, E. 69, 74, 98, 119, 120, 213, 237

309

Naor, M. 59 Neubauer, K.W. 227 Noth.M. 219, 220, 222, 223 Ogushi, M. 146 Orlinsky, H.M. 157-59

310

Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets

Paul, S.M. 227, 228, 231 Pederson, J. 113 Pesch.R. 19 Poethig,E.B. 154 Polak, F. 20, 22-24, 30, 173, 245, 260 Porter, J.R. 132, 159, 166, 225 Poulssen, N. 161

Tadmor, H. 67, 137-39, 185, 186, 194 Talmon, S. 119, 156, 178, 185, 192, 261, 271 Talshir, Z. 98, 196 Trebolle,J. 198 Tur-Sinai, N.H. 54, 61, 112, 127, 137, 156, 183, 207

Rad, G. von 53 Radday.Y.T. 17-19, 21, 22 Rehm, M. 69 Reviv.H. 198 Ridout,G.P. 178 Rofe", A. 52, 66, 102, 190, 237 Rogers, J.S. 41 Rosel.H.N. 228 Rost,L. 168

Uffenheimer, B. 51, 57, 81 Ulrich.E.C. 131

Sacon, K.K. 153 Savran,G.W. 69, 85, 93, 182 Schroer, S. 109 Seeligmann, I.L. 41, 53, 98, 192, 237-39 Segal, M.H. 81, 107, 109, 122, 124, 131, 148, 156, 159, 166, 183, 274 Semah, S. 26 Shiloah,M. 199 Shinan,A. 239, 240 Simon, U. 52, 53, 57-60, 62, 76, 78, 117, 183 Skehan,P.W. 104 Smith, H.P. 147 Staudt,E. 189, 190, 193 Sternberg, M. 28-30, 94, 97, 108, 11416, 126, 171, 172, 177 Stock, A. 26, 30 Strauss, A.L. 233, 234

VanderKam, J.C. 128 Vater,A.M. 66 Venham,G.J. 218, 222, 225 Watson, W.G.E. 20, 21, 23, 24, 78 Weinfeld, M. 190, 194 Weiss, R. 25, 86, 227-32, 234 Weissbach, F.H. 135 Welch, J.W. 13, 21, 26 Whitelam, K.W. 45 Williamson, H.G.M. 238 Wurthwein, E. 113 Yazon, H. 102, 106 Yeivin, S. 242 Yellin,D. 104, 231 Zakovitch, Y. 14, 27-30, 32, 34, 39, 55, 58, 65-72, 129, 148, 185, 187, 188, 226, 228, 230, 232, 239, 240, 245, 246, 248, 252, 254, 261, 265, 268, 274, 278 Zalevski, S. 44, 47, 87, 90, 148, 205, 213, 214, 241 Zeidel,M. 231, 232 Zevit,Z. 28, 32, 245

JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE OLD

TESTAMENT

SUPPLEMENT SERIES

239 Mark S. Smith, The Pilgrimage Pattern in Exodus 240 Eugene E. Carpenter (ed.), A Biblical Itinerary: In Search of Method, Form and Content. Essays in Honor of George W. Coats 241 Robert Karl Gnuse, No Other Gods: Emergent Monotheism in Israel 242 K.L. Noll, The Faces of David 243 Henning Graf Reventlow (ed.), Eschatology in the Bible and in Jewish and Christian Tradition 244 Walter E. Aufrecht, Neil A. Mirau and Steven W. Gauley (eds.), Urbanism in Antiquity: From Mesopotamia to Crete 245 Lester L. Grabbe (ed.), Can a 'History of Israel' Be Written? 246 Gillian M. Bediako, Primal Religion and the Bible: William Robertson Smith and his Heritage 247 Nathan Klaus, Pivot Patterns in the Former Prophets 248 Etienne Nodet, A Search for the Origins of Judaism: From Joshua to the Mishnah 249 William Paul Griffin, The God of the Prophets: An Analysis of Divine Action 250 Josette Elayi and Jean Sapin, Beyond the River: New Perspectives on Transeuphratene 251 Flemming A.J. Nielsen, The Tragedy in History: Herodotus and the Deuteronomistic History 252 David C. Mitchell, The Message of the Psalter: An Eschatological Programme in the Book of Psalms 253 William Johnstone, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Volume 1:1 Chronicles 1-2 Chronicles 9: Israel's Place among the Nations 254 William Johnstone, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Volume 2: 2 Chronicles 10-36: Guilt and Atonement 255 Larry L. Lyke, King David with the Wise Woman ofTekoa: The Resonance of Tradition in Parabolic Narrative 256 Roland Meynet, Rhetorical Analysis: An Introduction to Biblical Rhetoric 257 Philip R. Davies and David J.A. Clines (eds.), The World of Genesis: Persons, Places, Perspectives 258 Michael D. Goulder, The Psalms of the Return (Book V, Psalms 107-150): Studies in the Psalter, IV 259 Allen Rosengren Petersen, The Royal God: Enthronement Festivals in Ancient Israel and Ugarit? 261 Othmar Keel, Goddesses and Trees, New Moon and Yahweh: Ancient Near Eastern Art and the Hebrew Bible 262 Victor H. Matthews, Bernard M. Levinson and Tikva Frymer-Kensky (eds.), Gender and Law in the Hebrew Bible and the Ancient Near East

264 Donald F. Murray, Divine Prerogative and Royal Pretension: Pragmatics, Poetics, and Polemics in a Narrative Sequence about David (2 Samuel 5.17-7.29) 266 J. Cheryl Exum and Stephen D. Moore (eds.), Biblical Studies/Cultural Studies: The Third Sheffield Colloquium 269 David J.A. Clines and Stephen D. Moore (eds.), Auguries: The Jubilee Volume of the Sheffield Department of Biblical Studies 270 John Day (ed.), King and Messiah in Israel and the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the Oxford Old Testament Seminar 271 Wonsuk Ma, Until the Spirit Comes: The Spirit of God in the Book of Isaiah 272 James Richard Linville, Israel in the Book of Kings: The Past as a Project of Social Identity 273 Meir Lubetski, Claire Gottlieb and Sharon Keller (eds.), Boundaries of the Ancient Near Eastern World: A Tribute to Cyrus H. Gordon 274 Martin J. Buss, Biblical Form Criticism in its Context 275 William Johnstone, Chronicles and Exodus: An Analogy and its Application 276 Raz Kletter, Economic Keystones: The Weight System of the Kingdom ofJudah 277 Augustine Pagolu, The Religion of the Patriarchs 278 Lester L. Grabbe (ed.), Leading Captivity Captive: 'The Exile' as History and Ideology 279 Kari Latvus, God, Anger and Ideology: The Anger of God in Joshua and Judges in Relation to Deuteronomy and the Priestly Writings 280 Eric S. Christiansen, A Time to Tell: Narrative Strategies in Ecclesiastes 281 Peter D. Miscall, Isaiah 34-35: A Nightmare/A Dream 282 Joan E. Cook, Hannah's Desire, God's Design: Early Interpretations in the Story of Hannah 283 Kelvin Friebel, Jeremiah's and Ezekiel's Sign-Acts: Rhetorical Nonverbal Communication 284 M. Patrick Graham, Rick R. Marrs and Steven L. MacKenzie (eds.), Worship and the Hebrew Bible: Essays in Honor of John T. Willis 286 Wesley J. Bergen, Elisha and the End ofProphetism 287 Anne Fitzpatrick-McKinley, The Transformation ofTorahfrom Scribal Advice to Law 288 Diana Lipton, Revisions of the Night: Politics and Promises in the Patriarchal Dreams of Genesis 289 Joze KraSovec (ed.), The Interpretation of the Bible: The International Symposium in Slovenia 290 Frederick H. Cryer and Thomas L. Thompson (eds.), Qumran Between the Old and New Testaments 291 Christine Schams, Jewish Scribes in the Second-Temple Period 292 David J.A. Clines, On the Way to the Postmodern: Old Testament Essays, 1967-1998 Volume 1 293 David J.A. Clines, On the Way to the Postmodern: Old Testament Essays, 1967-1998 Volume 2